VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 11:57:40 01/30/02 Wed
Author: rich u
Subject: Re: Yasmin Greer the rest of the uterus crew
In reply to: tim 's message, "Re: Yasmin Greer the rest of the uterus crew" on 01:57:00 01/30/02 Wed

Right ive had a go at reading all of ppls arguments( but the web boards being odd and there appears to be no easy way of reading messages in proper date order,i apologise if i missed anything). Firstly i believe we have diverted away from Germaine Greer a tad. im not up on her thinkings but from what Sarah has said i think some people here(Yasmin and Tim) have attempted to make this a full blown battle of sexual superiority. not in keeping with what Sarah says is Germaine Greers thinkings. a lot of what we now appear ot be arguing about is very religion related. such points that have been made i.e. Eve was made second as God got it right second time, and then contradicted by the same writer( i believe this was Yasmin) who goes on to say that Eve was a non existent mythical figure, also seem to make the argument a trifle trivial. But what we need to address in this argument is that DO WE BELIEVE IN RELIGION? this will seperate different trains of thought if some do and some dont. for example i am not religious(but i respect the beliefs of those who are) and therefore i would not use creation of adam and eve as an argument as to who is more sexually superior. it is from my point of view therefore a good point in that women have let themselves be treated the way they do. but i also do agree with Sarah(i think it was) in that man has outgrown his stereotype role and needs to step down his ego somewhat.
i dont feel that either male nor female can easily put forward an argument as to who is the more superior sex without refering to religious texts(from whative seen here). there is no clear cut superior role for either sex that we can see in todays society. women are becoming more free willed(spelling?) and independant. the only reason that man WAS more dominant is that he was biologically different. This point is greatly neglected i feel. we seem to be putting forward arguments trying to slay the opposite sex without condsidering whether there is a great choice in the matter as to who appears more superior. biologically man is of bigger and stronger build and women have been designed for reproductive needs. man therefore would hunt and gather and build whilst woman would cook and reproduce etc. this worked in harmony but now we are developing intellect. which puts a whole new pespective on things. but yes we can see that man has unfairly but (due to his own stupidity) unkowingly made women submissive due to his biological nature. women accepted this due to theirs. but times change and we now think properly(at least try to). so what do we think of this then? was there a choice in previous times?have these traditions then merged with todays actions and society which means women are only now becoming more equal due to the development of intellect? if we were both biologically equal would there be such an argument? more to the pointif we had been intellectually advanced would there ever have been such roles leading to the point that i feel no one is clearly more superior and the only way we can try to prove this is by petty squablings in that god is man therefore man is superior or women let themselves become repressed. surely this isnt great intellect? no one as i have said has thought of our biological nature. please do. but even if you do you may bring in more religion which again isnt everyones beliefs so we may go round in circles. again can i call for a return to considering Germaine Greer as Sarah asked and can we have less of the silly put down comments that make brief religious references but are all easily flawed by religion themselves i.e. god is a he so he would make man better or that eve is better as she was created second so was the final product. tyrone also suggests the devil to be female which contradicts female being created last as she was complete. also if man is more dominant thus created first by god a man then why is Lilith idolised as a heroine( i think this is right) by man. but then if it was writing by man as much as by god then again why do religious texts see Lilith as a heroine in the eyes of man if he believes him self to be superior? i think i made a mistake or repeated myself somewhere. but u can see where im heading. religion provides arguments and then destroys them and they are not arguments of great worth. only arguments as to what we percieve them to suggest. can anyone point out any religious text which activelly states man to be superior (im not a religious reader and am curious to know of some)?
one final point as i have waffled to much, isnt good an omnipresent and omnipotent being and all that. wouldnt this suggest that god isnt he or a she but all at the same time. which i fear in the faces of all religious arguments (unless i have missed a text making God out ot be man, i could well have i am not saying my thought is the be all and end all its only a suggestion) puts a dampner on things. so can we use religion at all to argue the superior sex? and are we just for our own good selecting the points which support our race to be the more dominant and not considering other things? i feel if we carry on we will argue something we dont fuly support which stemmed decades ago and are only doing it as an ego boost if we succeed in making our sex out to be better. i really think ive said enough but im not a concise writer and i really wantd to try to make all my points clear. i would be most gracious to any thoughts or corrections etc.
rich

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.