Feminist Fantasies ruined the Show

I once knew a 110 pound woman who was being harassed by a 210 pound man who was in decent shape. She knocked out one of his teeth, broke his leg in two places and he ended up in the hospital for several days.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

And yet two of the most famous pirates in history were Anne Bonny and Mary Read. Go figure.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

[deleted]

You have made a total strawman argument. I specifically said "feminist fantasies" such as in a female pirate physically over powering men and I was only referring to Crossbones.

"Second of all anything men can do, women can do better."

No they cannot:

Women can bench press more weight than men?
Women can dead lift more weight than men?
Women can run faster than men?
Women can jump higher than men?
Women can throw things as far as men?
...and on and on and on.

The small minority of women body builders are not stronger than their male counterparts.

Women are a physical liability in combat as a soldier, they can have great difficulty carrying a man off the battlefield and they can be over powered in physical combat.

Women are also a liability as police officers as they can be physically over powered.

While women can fire weapons they struggle with larger caliber guns.

WTF does being a suicide bomber have to do with anything?

The Jodi Arias trial was a circus and no one knows what really happened but I am certain that she did not physically over power her boy friend, she had a gun.

Anyone can be a murderer too but that is not my argument.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Why should I reply to someone that appears to be so full of hatred? One could assume that you had some traumatic experience in the past. In any case, I am sorry for whatever caused you to feel that way, I really am.

You seem to be twisting what I am saying, or perhaps it could be the fact that English is only my third language, so I will do my best to clarify. I do not mind continuing this conversation, but please try to refrain from calling me a sexist or other such insults, because I take pride in viewing and treating everyone(race or gender) with equal value.

This turned out to be quite lengthy, I got carried away. Woops ;)

Seriously, do you believe that Chuck Norris or Jack Sparrow or Arnold Schwarzenegger or Bruce Willis or [insert action hero] could fend off and defeat a group of men? Probably not, but no one ever questions it when it's a man. Stupid people only get a stick up their butt when a woman is portrayed as a strong fighter, because it goes against their narrow world view.

Honestly, I question that too, It annoys me equally whether it being a man or a woman.

If you had bothered to read my first paragraph(my edit) I retracted my claim that it would never happen in real life. I had something like Xena The Warrior Princess in mind, something that I think that we could agree on, would never happen.

Using violence to solve problems is not feminism.

I never claimed that. I said that women being stronger(physical strength) than men is a feminist fantasy. Because they are NOT.

On tonight's episode Nenna threatened a fat tub of lard with a sword. She could take him down in a fight, easily. Because she's Nenna, and he's so out of shape that breathing causes him to break into a sweat. Not all men are muscular and strong, and not all women are small and weak.

That is correct, and maybe I haven't been clear enough. I never meant that any woman can never beat any man, but rather that when a woman and a man have had equal training and both are in similar shape compared to their genders average, the man would win. And I am only talking about a physical fight between them, I am sure that there are several other things that women in general would beat men at.

I don't give a damn what you're "fine" with. Seriously. Get over yourself. You have a sexist world view, and you're only "fine" with picking and choosing certain bits of information that don't conflict with your opinions so as not to chip away at your frail belief system and delicate ego. It's sad.

Again, I might have been unclear. I did not try to pick a lesser desired trait to appoint to women. That was merely an example of something I could remember on top of my head. To tell you the truth, I am not sure if that study(women being better in multitasking) is correct or not, although It did seem fairly thorough and unbiased. My point was to explain my own stance, that it wouldn't bother me the least bit whatever came to light as a proven fact of a trait where women were superior to men in. Well, honestly, I guess it is easy for me to sit here and claim right? But I really wholeheartedly believe I would be fine with whatever.

I've read some of these same articles that discuss this subject, and it was clear from user comments that a lot of men WEREN'T "fine" with being told that women were better at something than them.

I am fully aware of that, that there are plenty of men who think that they are 'better' than women. But that has to stand for them, I don't count my self into that group. I have for most of my adult life(I am 38) been annoyed with the gender politics, whether it being pro-feminism or anti-feminism(what is the opposite of feminism without adding 'anti' in front? Machoshism? Masculism?). I couldn't care less if my boss was a female or a male (or transgender). Or who have the biggest salary or who cooks the food and clean at home or stay home with the kids. I do most of the cooking in my home, we also do equal amount of cleaning though I do the washing(because of our personal traits). Geneder isn't all that important in my opinion, it should be the best man/woman for the job(if they want it). When I hear these debates, I often want to run around and smack people up. Why are they so thick and narrow minded? (I will continue and develop a bit on this further down)

No, we're not different. Gender is not tied to biological sex. Gender is learned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genderism

I actually thought about addressing this in my previous post but didn't want to make it too lengthy, but since you brought it up; After reading all your arguments, I suspect that you might believe that being different is something bad. If that's the case, I beg to differ. From a social standpoint, we are all equally worth, we should have the same rights and benefits. I know that it today , and across most cultures, is an unequal 'parity'(sorry need a better word, anyone?) between men, women and 'others', something I believe we should all work hard on to eradicate.

To some extent, I agree with you and also believe that gender is learned, though that isn't necessarily always a bad thing, and it doesn't mean that both 'main' sexes have the exact same general skill sets, strengths and weaknesses(no I am not mixing up genders and sexes, I know the difference.) If everyone used nail polish, wore skirts and had high heels(stereotyping, I know), how would I know who to try and pick up at the bar? Women have through evolution developed breast to attract men(advertising that they are fertile and can feed their offspring) in the same way as men have developed Adam's apples(deeper voice, meaning they are masculine and strong enough to protect and care for their family).

Ever heard of oestrogen and testosterone? Give a female testosterone and she will develop a deeper voice, body hair and more muscle mass. Likewise, give a man oestrogen and he will develop breasts(fat) a leaner voice and softer skin. These are facts, and there are countless and countless of sources of proof.

I do acknowledge that there are variations in-between our two main genders.
Normally a girl has 46XX chromosomes and a male has 46XY chromosomes. But in a few out of a thousand births you get individuals with 45X or 45Y, or 47XXX/47XXY/47XYY. There are also cases with males who have 46XX and Females with 46XY. I don't wish to dive deep into this, because it could take all day, it is much easier for you to google around and read for yourself.

Most of these people wont be able to help our race to reproduce and evolve, though they are still of equal worth in our society.

(some might be offended by this, I am sorry if that's the case, not being prejudice or condescending, socially we are all of equal worth imho.)
From a biological viewpoint, these variations are in most cases something that decrease our race's(human) total/average strength. Biologically, all life strives to reproduce and survive, if that was not the case we wouldn't be here or have evolved to what we are today. Our race has evolved to require two sexes to reproduce(which links to gender traits, something that might seem trivial but actually very important and beneficial), and they should biologically be attracted to the opposite sex and gender.

That is not to say that all deviations from the biological norm are bad, on the contrary, we need deviations to evolve. It was a deviation(mutation) from the norm within the brown bear population in the Arctic that made life to a white bear. A white bear that in that environment was better equipped to sneak up on its pray and therefore better survive. That white bears offspring who was also white and better equipped to survive than their fellow brown bears had a much easier life and longer average lifespan. Through time there was no brown bears left in that area. Today they have further evolved and we call them Polar Bears.

In that sense, deviations are essential. We need diversity to evolve. But there are not only good deviations, being born without genitals or being attracted to the 'wrong' sex(again, biologically) etc., must be deemed as less beneficial since they generally don't help to reproduce and further our race. I repeat, socially, they are of equal worth and can benefit society just as much as the rest of us.

To conclude my views on this genderism topic, with why I think that genders being linked to the different sexes is important;
We(men and women) have through evolution developed different traits because it is more efficient. Sorry but I need to dumb this down a bit, back to the time when humans started to evolve, 2.5 million years ago. If we had the same strengths and weaknesses, we would on average be equally good at caring for our young and go out hunting, we could take turn and all be happy but none would be exceptional at anything. Though if we had developed different strengths, we would both easier succeed in a certain area, hence together, much better equipped to survive and evolve than if we all had the same strengths.

You can easily find a difference between males and females across almost every single species. There are species that only have one sex, but all species that do have more than one sex, they have evolved to be different, because it is beneficial for their survival. For the same reason why it is easier to eat your food with both a fork and a knife rather than just one of them, and in some cases a spoon is all you need. lol sorry, might be a bad analogy but it was what popped up and I went with it :)

We don't live in caves today, and we have all sorts of tools to help us survive. But we have only lived like this for a short while and evolution takes time. Some day we might all be of the same sex and gender, who knows?

Fact is(a few random differences I found):
Men have about 50% more upper body strength and 33% more lower body strength.
Men have about 30% more lung capacity.
Men have a higher metabolism. Because of this, women can withstand higher temperatures better.
Women has about 20% less red blood cells(wich carry oxygen) and therefore faint more easy.
Women have shorter legs and head and a longer trunk.
Women's heart beat faster and they have lower blood pressure.

We have a lot of differences, both physical and psychological, and because of this, we have different strengths.

Biological sex doesn't determine what we will be good at, and there's no such thing as RACE either. Biologically, Africans and Europeans and everyone in-between have 99.9% of the same DNA. There is only one race: human. The separate races and separate genders idea is a social construct, not biological.

OMG stop the press, roll out the red carpet and call the media, I think we agree on something! :)
Yes there are only one biological human race; Homo sapiens sapiens. And the difference of our socially constructed races are so small that they are not noticeable other than skin colour and such small and trivial things when we are looking at the human genome.

Though, I have to again disagree with you about the sexes. I have no idea how much the human genome differ between males and females, but that we differ, I am sure of. Our sex won't determine exactly what we will be good at, no, but that doesn't mean we are equal.

Men produce more testosterone, which stimulates muscle mass and growth, increases bone density, It deepens your voice and stimulate axillary hair growth(and hair loss when you are older) It also makes you more aggressive.

Women produce more oestrogen, it helps to develop the female traits, too tired to write more now. Google it!

Though I believe that patriarchy is real, and that male violence is the greatest threat to women. What would possibly be an "evolutionary benefit" for that? There isn't.

Males being more aggressive is indeed an evolutionary benefit to be able to scare of intruders, defend your family and catch pray. We have lived in the wild for a long long time and only as modern humans for a short while. I believe that through time, as it becomes less and less important, males more aggressive nature will decline with further evolution.

Women are people, with our own rights and needs.

I agree completely.

What I don't believe is that there's a biological reason that men enslave, control, rape, beat, and murder women. I believe that abusers are raised, not born. I believe that male privilege is taught and learned, and transmitted through patriarchal societal structures.

Here is one of those feminist viewpoints that makes me really annoyed. In my view, it is not men who enslave, control, rape, beat and murder women. It is stronger people(generally men(testosterone)) who does that to weaker people(usually women(oestrogen)). You see the difference? I agree that much of this is taught. But the fact of the hormones do play a big part. The reason why it is mostly men who does all that to women is because they can, they are physically stronger. This doesn't mean that men are asses and women are not. A female ass would have a much more difficult time doing that to a man than vice versa if she wanted. Plus she lack the testosterone which makes you more aggressive.

I don't feel sorry for the women who are victims, I feel sorry for all the victims.

What you're describing is an economics term called comparative advantage. It isn't based on gender. You need to go back to school. The stuff you're talking about wasn't taught in any classroom, it's just your own sexist, biased world view.

Depending on where you live, the science of evolution is indeed taught in the classroom, as well as taught by scientists all over the world. I haven't studied economics but based on what I got from skimming through a Wikipedia article, it sounds to be quite similar indeed. If that is not how we have evolved, can you explain why only women can breast feed their infants(yes I know there are some reported cases where males could lactate, generally though, they can't.)? My view is that it makes no sense for everyone to be average good at everything, better to split it up and reap the benefits together. Though I am open for suggestions, If you can provide a better explanation I'd be most grateful, and maybe even educated :)


Finally:

Nothing_Is_Forever claims that woman are better than men in everything.
This is a straw man, because that's not what I said you're twisting words around.

Your exact phrase was:

Second of all anything men can do, women can do better. You think women are just so weak and fragile, and that all men are big and strong. LOL Proves how dumb you are. You are spouting off genderism. Please go look up what that word means. There are lot's of short men, and lot's of large women, and just the opposite.

That statement(in bold) was the main reason why I felt that I had to jump in and join this conversation in the first place.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

I dont mind that per se. Fighting with a sword takes a lot mor than brute strenght.
It gets tricky when a show (and clearly Crossbones is guilty of this) fails to show the skill that allows a woman to dominate men twice as big and strong as herself in combat.I wouldnt mind her being quicker and more skilled. but if she just muscles her way through fighing like a guy twice her size then it gets stupid and yes I blame Hollywood.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

[deleted]

Not everything has to do with upper body strength you meat head.

Agility and swordplay were a good portion of this era and this show.

I dont think its far fetched to think if a woman was good with a pistol/musket and also great with a blade that she couldn't hold her own with a man in a fight to the death.

sure if it was a fist fight or a wrestling match she would get crushed but knowing her strengths and weaknesses would just mean she would avoid brute strenght battles and chose finesse and agility instead.

woman on average are more agile then men are especially men who have twice the upper body strength of a woman (large men)being heavy makes you typically slower.

most one handed swords aren't that heavy and if you think a woman needs a mans upper body strength to stick the pointy end into your belly or slash your throat then you sir are a moron.

I agree that it might have been rare for a woman to get to that point of ability but its not like it couldn't be done.

look at woman in this era for instance http://www.tapology.com/rankings/33-current-best-pound-for-pound-femal e-mma-fighters All these woman would likely kick your 230lb ass and are half your size and i guarantee you it wouldnt be beacause they grappled you down they would use their agility and speed to take you out.

Raylan GIvens: didn't i tell you you were gonna wish i killed ya... well don't ya?

reply share

add reply

formatting help