[,alt.religion,alt.education,alt.feminism.individualism
cut to avoid spam. Crossposting to 7 unrelated groups is very
rude. 4 is too many, but it's relevant to 3 of them and I think
the 4th is where Shadow Dancer "lives"]
On Fri, 12 Jul 2002 23:08:17 -0500, "Shadow Dancer"
<insomniac at winterslight.org> wrote:
[concerning men]
>It doesn't make them smarter and their corpus collosums are still screwed
>up.
>>I guess you missed the statistics that:
>>(1) A woman's pain threshhold is far higher, due to the ability to bear
>children; roughly 5 minutes of labor pain would literally kill a man.
If it wasn't so sad, it would be amusing to see these two extreme
sexists babbling crap to "prove" their sexism is reasonable.
I know for a fact that you cannot provide any evidence to support
your statement, above, or any part of it. You are just burbling
the prevailing sexism.
If anyone wishes to look for themselves, just do a search
for "pain threshold +men +women" at, for example, www.google.com
You will find numerous studies, some of which conclude that
women have a higher pain threshold than men and some of
which conclude the reverse. None of them come anywhere
near supporting the ridiculous statement made by Shadow Dancer.
>(2) A woman's organs are larger, because they bear children.
On average, they are smaller because women are, on average, smaller.
Do you believe the rubbish you write, or are you just cunning
enough to realise that a lie is effective propaganda to promote
prejudice?
You don't even understand the difference between a trend and
an absolute, do you?
>(3) A woman's endurance is greater because she is the child-bearer.
I know for a fact that you cannot provide any evidence to support
your statement, above.
All you are doing is making circular arguments from child-bearing.
That's it. You have no evidence to support your sexist spew.
John Knight is just as sexist as you, but he has evidence behind
him. Carefully selected evidence strongly spun, but some evidence
none the less. You are just babbling female supremacist propaganda.
>You can begin by tossing out ALL those sports statistics above. The reason
>women are not in those stats is because *they are in stats for WOMEN'S
>SPORTS*. Misogynists like you shut them out of the male-dominated sports.
Don't be silly. Women have their own protected sporting events because
they aren't good enough to compete with the best men in any sport
requiring athleticism. Women get as much fame and money for doing less
work at a much lower level of ability and sexist hypocrites like you still
complain that women are being discriminated against.
I would very much like all sex-specific sporting events to be scrapped
and replaced with the same events, but based solely on sporting
performance. Just for a short while, to make it abundantly clear
that sexist whiners like you are talking silly rubbish. After a couple
of years without a single famous female athlete and with famous
sportswomen only in sports like darts, it should be clear even to
the sheeple who go along with the normal belief that men are
oppressive scumbags forcing women down that women cannot
compete with men on an equal footing in almost any sport at the
highest levels. You wouldn't get a woman in the top 100 in the
vast majority of sports.
Here's where you mention the famous Billie Jean King vs. Bobbie Riggs
tennis match....which proved that the best female tennis player in
the world at the height of her abilities could beat a 56 year old man
who hadn't been good enough to play competetively for well over
a decade, if not two.
There have been other tennis matches between men and women,
including another one with Bobbie Riggs against the best female
player, which he won in straight sets (at the age of 56). There was
also one in which the man had a much large court area to defend
and still won in straight sets. None of those matches got any
publicity of course, as they didn't help to promote antimale sexism.
>I guess you forgot that people like Marie Curie are solely responsible for
>the use of X-rays and similar systems.
Not only is that a lie, it is a silly lie. Are you incapable of thought?
People as sexist as yourself usually are. There are thousands of
people who are responsible for the use of X-rays and similar systems.
Marie Curie did some of the most important work in the early days
of the investigation of radioactivity and is rightly regarded as a
brilliant scientist, but she was not solely responsible for the use of
such a large field and didn't do that much work in the field of X-rays
(she was investigating a different form of radiation). I am not surpised
to see you ignoring the work of Pierre Curie, who won a Nobel prize for
his work in the same field. After all, he was a man, so you think of him
as grossly inferior. What about Henri Becquerel, who made the discovery
that inspired Marie Curie's work, or all the other men in the field?
In fact, the use of X-rays was invented by Wilhelm Conrad
Röntgen on November 8th, 1895. A week later, he took
the first x-ray of a person's bone structure, one of the most
important uses of X-rays. You can see the photo here:
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blxray.htm
None of this information is hard to find. Bigots like you rely
on people not checking the lies you make. Since you
have the prevailing sexism behind you, you are correct
in thinking that can say anything you like (as long as
it glorifies women, denigrates men, or both) and few people
will even take a couple of minutes to check whether you
are lying, as you will be.
For a more complete guide to the people involved in the
discovery of the use of X-rays, click on the "Discovery of
the X-ray" link. That shows that the development of understanding
in a scientific field is not the sole responsibility of anyone. They
all build on the work of earlier scientists.
[more sexist crap and chest-beating from Shadow Dancer]
--
Always remember you're unique.
Just like everyone else. (Anon)
