English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

OK get ready for controversy! I believe women have woken up to the fact that the chances are they will be alone and unwed, and therefore will have to work for a living. Whilst I absolutely applaud women being able to earn as much as men, and therefore keep their dignity, it has meant that men have lost theirs because they no longer feel they can provide for a woman and family.

As a result the country is full of 30-year old childless women longing to meet a guy who earns significantly more than them so that they can settle down, but they can't. Women are attracted to strong men who can provide security for their children, but, because men are no longer earning substantially more than them, they are having a hard time of it. This is the one failure of feminism, and both sexes are suffering as a result. Thoughts anyone?
Ben, London

2007-10-07 21:03:25 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science Gender Studies

Simple, females have always been smarter than males and we've finally learned the rules of the male dominated game to prove it.
Dina, USA


I find it interesting that when girls were underperforming no one ever questioned it or suggested that girls should receive special attention, but as soon as the poor boys are outdone by girls, there is a great furore with various people calling for something to be done. Has anyone ever considered that once girls are given truly equal opportunity and tuition, that they are simply demonstrating they really are superior?
Kate, England

2007-10-07 21:04:25 · update #1

find it very tragic that some of the posts written by women here use the succes of their gender as some sort of crutch for their own failings. Let's make on thing clear, it doesn't matter how well all the rest of your sex do, only how well YOU do. I suggest Dina, USA and Kate, Enlgand stop "rooting for their side" and start to address how we can achieve true equality. Their comments are childish.
Matt, Amsterdam, Netherlands (ex-UK)

2007-10-07 21:05:07 · update #2

the topic was Why are girls doing better? in gcse


hmmm i vaguely remember something about guys doing better in school than the girls and there was some sort of change that encouraged them or something of the sort and
i thought it evened out but appearantly

The pendulum swings back and forth. Focus on the girls until they are doing better than the boys. Then the right wing starts bitching because they feel women are inferior creatures, so then the focus is placed back onto boys until they start doing better than the girls again. The left wing gets upset because they feel men are inferior creatures, and repeat ad nauseum.


why ?

why when the ads where put out there slogan wasnt changed from take your son to work day to take your "children" to work day?

hmmm interestng thought just popped up
is everything we do promoting sexism?

say males do better in school
signs will pop up saying encourage girls to do better etc etc which reinforces into the girls minds that they have to .

2007-10-07 21:10:17 · update #3

better than the males
and if the females did better then the men would ***** and say we have to do better than the women.


is it the competitive nature of men (humans)
is it because we( humans) are too damn stupid to realise we should compete based on the competition rather than sex?


another interesting qoute here
I am 40 and here in Jamaica, I have seen the decline in aptitude of males versus females over the last 15 years. Today 80% of our university graduates are females. I have seen a steady decline in the quality of male candidates available to fill positions in my work place. Today - if I wish to fill say a Sales or Marketing post - 9/10 pre-screened applicants will be women - and the fellow got into the pile because we felt obligated to get one into the pile. sad.gif

I believe a combination of factors is driving this phenomenon, example, the reduced involvement of mothers in child rearing as they are busy earning livings.

2007-10-07 21:13:35 · update #4

but then again we also have to realise that there are more of u buggers than us. no offense XD

hmmm

i believe this "full" equality thing is not fully here but it is here and in many areas there is equality and many that are as unequal as 2+2=5

i just hope in the attempt for equality that women dont make the same mistake that men did. and discriminate ( i didnt say feminists i said women)


i believe equality is like a see saw
to get it fully equal it has to go be lower on each side then go back and forth a little then it will even out. i believe (hope) we are in that stage

2007-10-07 21:17:41 · update #5

kate and lina i think her name is are examples of the see saw tilting your side


neither sex needs that kind of input. i mean if you are smarter i guess ill stay home hmm

i can understand now how some of the theories are made

2007-10-07 21:23:33 · update #6

LEALA ? WHAT?? KILLING COWS WITH RADIOACTIVE RUBBERBANDS? EARWIGS?

2007-10-07 21:25:08 · update #7

lizzie how old are you? im 21 in every school ive been to every1 was loud and rambunctious (holly crap i spelled it right) every1 raised there hands.

wait though i do remember being jealous that girls were more encouraged to ask questions but in the end that didnt stop me from doing good in school. by encouraged i mean

there was alot more (jessica what do u think about this theory?) kinda questions

but if you were trying to encourage women that would be needed. hmmm

its how these thigns are done that is the problem


hmm another belief

the theory of making females equal is good but how it actually works is different

because by encouraging one sex over the other to make it equal you dont do that what you do is subvertly discourage one sex. what would have to be done is teachers need to evenly ask for class participation instead of singling out a particular sex

2007-10-07 21:30:24 · update #8

hmm more reading for ya ( maybe i should start a blog)

Today 80% of our university graduates are females. I have seen a steady decline in the quality of male candidates available to fill positions in my work place.==== = is this because more attention is being focused on the women? or is it because men now a days are sucking hardcore?

are the gender roles merely being interchanged now?

*emo guys* basically girls without vagina's i mean in some of the younger people now its a bit cool to be girlish and cry and basically be a pussy ( no crying doesnt make u a pussy but crying like a girl while a girl is next to you wondering wtf does) *being overly sensitive) i mean we are men for a reason.

anyway train of thought got ****** up there

ill continue after i finish my dew

2007-10-07 21:36:29 · update #9

squek--- what? where did u get that females are smarter because they are afraid to die alone?

Isn't that the whole feminist idea rejecting traditional female roles and being equal or superior to men?

so basically what youre telling me is that feminist want to interchange the current roles and become the men? they want to become the sexist pigs that we*men* are?

*not all of us *

is it some form of revenge?

2007-10-07 21:38:57 · update #10

im sorry rovale where teh fcuk do u live?

supermarket jobs and shi7

UMM NOOO im in nyc thats utter bs

maybe they get those jobs because that all their qualified but trust me there are alot of high position jobs being held by women and i dont really 100% believe they are being forcibly held down to such pitiful jobs.

2007-10-07 21:41:15 · update #11

llani if the males apply themselves in school they will get better grades.

ok so women werernt getting good grades because they werent encouraged to take certain classes etc etc

is it not also possible that the women werent doing good also because they werent applying themselves too?

have males all over suddenly decided to not apply themselves to school work?
i dont know i just find it offending that you would say that
the only reason we arent doing good is because we arent applying ourselves.

2007-10-07 21:45:06 · update #12

7 answers

First off, girls are doing better than males in school b/c of pro-female education - nothing to do with Dina's assertion in that 'females have always been smarter than males' - this has been proven that men, on average, are more intelligent than females[1] - this also includes the fact that men are logical than women. There is a also a reason why all inventions of worth have been invented by men, and why all the great thinkers, scientists, inventors, etc are men.

Kate's assertion that women are demonstrating that they really are "superior" is ridiculous and childish - again, the reason why females are doing better is because the whole education system is geared towards the learning abilities of females[2] - in essence, it has been 'feminized', designed to make males struggle. This includes an emphasis on 'communication', which females obviously excel at, such as collaborative workgroups; girl-friendly curriculum; a reduced emphasis in classroom competition, spelling bees, etc; a reduced emphasis in school on competition; teacher bias (I recall, 80% of teachers are females, who have been most likely indoctrinated by feminism and thus they will tend to favor girls), etc.

Besides, I don't forese the education system changing any time soon, but anyway men can earn money without entering into the education system. Men are creative, resourceful and aggressive - we don't need a degree to make money - this probably explains why virtually all young entrepreneurs are men.

In essence, with the 60/40 ration now of women to men in college/universities and expected to increase, along with men declining higher education, women will eventually dominate the West; gaining higher employment positions in the private sector and government. This is what feminists wanted; domination. Don't believe me? Then why haven't feminists redressed the aforesaid gender imbalance at colleges/universities, like they did 30+ years ago? Exactly.

The first comment is also right, which makes me chuckle; these women end up as lonely, childless spinsters, and thus have to work until they are at least 60. This is already a recent phenomenon I read about in articles [3]. These 30-something women, after devoting their most fertile years towards a career and then after gettin tired of playin career gal, they usually expect to find some rich sucker, settle down and have children. THe problem is that they set their standards way too high (9/10 women marry up for feelings of safety and security) and the fact that there is a decline in eligible men for them - these are typically men who are either more intelligent or more rich; or both. So that is the consequence of being a high-flyng career woman.

That's their own issue though - they got themselves into the mess for their selfish greed to be like a 'man', in that they challenge men on their traditional grounds and by mocking male power by imitating it, while having contempt for their very nature as a person; femininity.

"[men] no longer feel they can provide for a woman and family."

Certainly, a good thing.

2007-10-07 22:11:57 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Well that is just stupid. Females are smarter because they are afraid they will die alone? Females aren't the only ones afraid of that i'm sure many males are as well. Wouldn't their results be the same? Besides if these females who are smarter and getting better jobs with more money are doing this because of feminist influence why would they have a problem with making more money than their spouse? Isn't that the whole feminist idea rejecting traditional female roles and being equal or superior to men?

2007-10-08 04:33:36 · answer #2 · answered by nobody 5 · 0 0

I think the reasons males aren't performing as well in school is not necessarily because of an anti-male bias at the schools. I believe it has more to do with the parents and the boys themselves. Boys can still get relatively high paying jobs such as miners, truckers, and construction workers when they grow up. These jobs don't require as much of an education as other careers. Then there are the parents. Many parents have this absurd idea that their child will become the next Tiger Woods and get those huge endorsement deals so they push them into sports instead of encouraging them to get an education. On the other hand, the choices for girls without an education are more limited. They don't have many options besides becoming fast food workers, convenience store cashiers, or working at dead-end office jobs. That's why the girls are being encouraged to excel at school more.

2007-10-08 04:16:32 · answer #3 · answered by RoVale 7 · 1 1

I think that the main changes have been to the perceived roles
that men and women play in society. In my era and prior to that, girls were not enocuraged to appear intelligent in front of males. It was all about assuaging the male ego and also trying to find a husband. Many times I witnessed my female classmates act out this " Could you please explain this to me ....." to attract the attention of a boy. We were not encouraged to pursue challenging or unusual careers as it was assumed that we would give up working when our babies arrived.
The table has turned to the other extreme. Women now can choose and they are choosing to be financially independent and are wanting a partner with similar intellect and income as well as certain values and common interests. Not all men are comfortable with this situation and not all women are prepared to compromise their standards. And why should they given that the chances of marriages being successful is about 50% in most western countries. It is to be expected then that there will be more females and males who do not marry and have children, some by choice and some by circumstance. Is this a failure? Well, divorce is a failure as well.

2007-10-08 04:22:47 · answer #4 · answered by lizzie 5 · 0 0

Personally I think they don't give a damn one way or the other. See those who give a damn act accordingly. Those who don't give a damn act accordingly. Whoo hoo isn't that a bite in the backside: there are women out there who want a strong man who is earning more than them, yet at the same time they want the same pay as them and or more themselves. Over and over again my theory of greed is being proven. Well, like they say before you decide you want to ear that cow just make sure you know how to kill it first, cause hitting it with a rubber band is not going to do it.

2007-10-08 04:23:13 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

It's good that women no longer have to be with a man just because he makes more money or is the bread winner. Now women can choose. And they most certainly won't want a man, who feels he lost his dignity because he feels he can no longer provide.
Relationships are partnerships and it doesn't matter who makes more money, man or woman. It should be about the people and not the money.
And where are all the 30 year old women who long for the well earning me??? Trust me, there is no one suffering. Women want men for companionship and love. And if they have the need for security they marry someone who is older and has more.

If the males apply themselves in school they will get good grades.

2007-10-08 04:16:48 · answer #6 · answered by Llani 5 · 1 1

Your (question??) is much too long-winded. I don't want to spend an hour-and-a-half reading and digesting it.

What statistics can you quote that support your theory?

2007-10-08 05:12:11 · answer #7 · answered by Gee Wye 6 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers