Jump to content


The difference between male and female?


  • Please log in to reply
127 replies to this topic

RodneyDangerfield #81 Posted Apr 27 2014 - 17:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 72344 battles
  • 6,106
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011


Blitzkonig_Hawkish #82 Posted Apr 27 2014 - 22:39

    Captain

  • Players
  • 23391 battles
  • 1,094
  • [GRIMY] GRIMY
  • Member since:
    04-27-2013

View Postmattwong, on Apr 27 2014 - 09:29, said:

 

LOL ... what an ironic statement, coming from someone who thinks "traditional values" justify themselves, and openly laughs at anyone who thinks otherwise.  At least my statement was obviously in jest; yours appears to be quite serious.

 

Traditional values do justify themselves because they are proven and were the solution humanity used for most of civilization (and still do)(do you deny evolution too?), progressive values don't. And all liberal values, aka those based on liberalism, not partys, are false because they are based on belief in God (remember now, you don't believe in God). To keep having Liberal beliefs, such as intrinsic human rights, is slave morality. The point of "God is dead" by Nietzsche is that if you no longer believe in God then why do you keep the same morals of liberalism of the weak being good? All the liberal and equality ideas are just Christianity without a God and a religious dogma not based on fact. If we extrapolate the rule of the jungle its easy to see that might is right. There is no equality and there is no reason to believe in equality. Those are dogmas. Nature does not have equality it has strength leading and the poor and weak being culled and fed on.

 

TL:DR all rights and equality are backed up by force, ex. Japanese internment camps, your rights dont exist unless you can enforce them.

 

 

Also in China there isnt religion per say but virginal brides are strongly preferred and extra marital sex is strongly shamed. China also burned libraries for non religious reasons, the same reason that all libraries are burnt (they killed all the scholars and scribes too though).

 

Keep your small minded liberal world view though, you are just as much a fundamentalist dogmatist as any religious zealot. Make sure to blame religion for everything and not examine any evidence that might conflict with your worldview while mocking religious people and claiming to be "scientific".



Frogstar_B #83 Posted Apr 28 2014 - 02:37

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7053 battles
  • 797
  • Member since:
    09-01-2012

Male tanks had cannon, designed for some AT duty and for launching thermite at the enemy trenches. Female tanks had machine guns. The female tanks covered the male tanks from infantry.

 

(Eventually, someone came up with the bright idea of making Hermaphrodite tanks, which carried both.)



Mikosah #84 Posted Apr 28 2014 - 06:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 4,452
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

The better question to ask is "what do the two have in common?"

 

And when we're talking psychology, its just a matter of instinct and the various permutations and corruptions that have arisen from our instincts. But in the end, it is still just instinct. The instinct to feed, the instinct to seek shelter, the instinct to reproduce, the instinct to rely on social groups for survival. And all of our habits and quirks are just the result of these, and that applies to both sexes. For that matter, it applies to just about every living thing on the planet.

 

As to how the sexes differ psychologically, that too is just a function of natural efficiency through instinct. Simply, how do we pop out as many disgusting fluid-covered bebbehs in the shortest span of time? How do we give the little creatures good enough odds of survival at a viable cost of time and energy? The results speak for themselves. The male psychology is efficient precisely because there isn't such a big emotional investment in any one sexual partner. The female psychology is efficient precisely because there is. This of course is under the assumption of ideal circumstances. But in the real world, ideal circumstances don't come along often. Because most circumstances aren't ideal, there's exceptions to both rules. The system wouldn't be effective if it didn't have some degree of flexibility. In a sense, we could say that our modern social constructs only exist because we take advantage of this flexibility. And because this flexibility tends to bend (or even break) the rules on a fairly regular basis, it could be said that the psychological differences between the sexes may ultimately become irrelevant and trivial.

 

But at least in the here and now, I for one can say that I define my masculinity through the instinct that I feel that compels me to stick my junk in anything that resembles a female orifice. It feels easy to relate to others who have this same instinct- it helps to understand their motivations. Likewise, from this perspective its easy to identify the counterpart instinct, which goes to the tune of "keep your icky appendages to yourself!" Translated to instinctual terms, this really means: "Reproduction is a much larger physical investment for me than it is for you. I'm not getting anywhere near you until I'm sure your genes aren't defective!" The juxtaposition between these diametrically-opposed instincts is (as I see it) the most fundamental divide between the sexes. Regardless to the social norms which come and go, this instinct will likely remain intact for centuries to come.



Scootaloo23 #85 Posted Apr 28 2014 - 14:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 10233 battles
  • 8,045
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012

View PostMikosah, on Apr 28 2014 - 00:34, said:

The better question to ask is "what do the two have in common?"

 

And when we're talking psychology, its just a matter of instinct and the various permutations and corruptions that have arisen from our instincts. But in the end, it is still just instinct. The instinct to feed, the instinct to seek shelter, the instinct to reproduce, the instinct to rely on social groups for survival. And all of our habits and quirks are just the result of these, and that applies to both sexes. For that matter, it applies to just about every living thing on the planet.

 

As to how the sexes differ psychologically, that too is just a function of natural efficiency through instinct. Simply, how do we pop out as many disgusting fluid-covered bebbehs in the shortest span of time? How do we give the little creatures good enough odds of survival at a viable cost of time and energy? The results speak for themselves. The male psychology is efficient precisely because there isn't such a big emotional investment in any one sexual partner. The female psychology is efficient precisely because there is. This of course is under the assumption of ideal circumstances. But in the real world, ideal circumstances don't come along often. Because most circumstances aren't ideal, there's exceptions to both rules. The system wouldn't be effective if it didn't have some degree of flexibility. In a sense, we could say that our modern social constructs only exist because we take advantage of this flexibility. And because this flexibility tends to bend (or even break) the rules on a fairly regular basis, it could be said that the psychological differences between the sexes may ultimately become irrelevant and trivial.

 

But at least in the here and now, I for one can say that I define my masculinity through the instinct that I feel that compels me to stick my junk in anything that resembles a female orifice. It feels easy to relate to others who have this same instinct- it helps to understand their motivations. Likewise, from this perspective its easy to identify the counterpart instinct, which goes to the tune of "keep your icky appendages to yourself!" Translated to instinctual terms, this really means: "Reproduction is a much larger physical investment for me than it is for you. I'm not getting anywhere near you until I'm sure your genes aren't defective!" The juxtaposition between these diametrically-opposed instincts is (as I see it) the most fundamental divide between the sexes. Regardless to the social norms which come and go, this instinct will likely remain intact for centuries to come.

 

Thanks to child support laws, the male instinct now has to be tempered with a new instinct of, "Keep your legs closed until I can be sure you won't pop out a hole in my pocket!"

 

:tongue:



LittleWhiteMouse #86 Posted Apr 28 2014 - 15:53

    Captain

  • Players
  • 14876 battles
  • 1,991
  • Member since:
    01-04-2013
I'll trade you wanting to boink anything with curves with turning into a puddle and wanting to mother anything cute I come across.  Seriously, this prompts all sorts of bad decisions on my part, not the least of which is buying and researching tanks because they look adorable.  FV304, I'm looking at you.

Magick #87 Posted Apr 28 2014 - 15:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 3602 battles
  • 2,833
  • Member since:
    01-31-2011

women = time+ money (Everyone knows that women require time and money)

 

time=money  (once again, we know that time is money.)

 

women=money^2.  (women are money squared)

 

money= root of evil  (once again, a given.)

 

Therefore:

 

Women= (root of evil)^2

 

Women=Evil



Mikosah #88 Posted Apr 28 2014 - 16:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 17582 battles
  • 4,452
  • Member since:
    01-24-2013

View PostScootaloo23, on Apr 28 2014 - 08:01, said:

 

Thanks to child support laws, the male instinct now has to be tempered with a new instinct of, "Keep your legs closed until I can be sure you won't pop out a hole in my pocket!"

 

:tongue:

 

That's precisely what I meant when I said that our social constructs are pushing the natural system's flexibility.



mattwong #89 Posted May 02 2014 - 18:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 30470 battles
  • 17,333
  • Member since:
    03-03-2012

View PostMagick, on Apr 28 2014 - 10:57, said:

women = time+ money (Everyone knows that women require time and money)

 

time=money  (once again, we know that time is money.)

 

women=money^2.  (women are money squared)

 

money= root of evil  (once again, a given.)

 

Therefore:

 

Women= (root of evil)^2

 

Women=Evil

 

Your math is wrong.  If women = time + money, and time = money, then women = 2(money), not money^2.



Magick #90 Posted May 04 2014 - 17:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 3602 battles
  • 2,833
  • Member since:
    01-31-2011

View Postmattwong, on May 02 2014 - 13:04, said:

 

Your math is wrong.  If women = time + money, and time = money, then women = 2(money), not money^2.

I couldn't remember the proper way to write the equation. Thanks for the correction.



Scootalove #91 Posted May 04 2014 - 19:52

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 15781 battles
  • 873
  • [ERAD] ERAD
  • Member since:
    05-06-2011

View PostBlitzkonig_Hawkish, on Apr 27 2014 - 15:39, said:

 

Traditional values do justify themselves because they are proven and were the solution humanity used for most of civilization (and still do)(do you deny evolution too?), progressive values don't. And all liberal values, aka those based on liberalism, not partys, are false because they are based on belief in God (remember now, you don't believe in God). To keep having Liberal beliefs, such as intrinsic human rights, is slave morality. The point of "God is dead" by Nietzsche is that if you no longer believe in God then why do you keep the same morals of liberalism of the weak being good? All the liberal and equality ideas are just Christianity without a God and a religious dogma not based on fact. If we extrapolate the rule of the jungle its easy to see that might is right. There is no equality and there is no reason to believe in equality. Those are dogmas. Nature does not have equality it has strength leading and the poor and weak being culled and fed on.

 

 

I'ma take this sentence by sentence, I got nothing to do today.

 

1st line:  You are correct in saying traditional values were the solution humanity has used before.  Thats the definition of traditional.  The disconnect is where you think traditional values are homogenous.  Slavery has be used by humanity for thousands of years.  It is a "traditional value" according to you're definition, but I suspect that you're not advocating we conquer and enslave weaker nations, despite this being tradition.  Dunno what you are going on about with the evolution quip, considering the science behind evolutionary theory is a relatively new concept.

 

2nd line:  You are correct that most christian sects believe in Social Justice, which is considered a liberal ideal these days, but I'm not sure why you think progressives don't believe in God.  I mean, I do, and I'm a liberal because I do, so yeah, wrong there.

3rd line:  Your so-called "Slave Morality" is what Jesus preached.  Deal with it.:glasses:  I think the problem you're having is the whole "liberals cant belive in God" bit, while the folks I know belive in quite a few things, from the Abrahamic religions to Paganism to Humanism. (And, naturally, everything I haven't mentioned as well)

 

4th line:  That is literally the most insane reading of "God is Dead" I have ever heard.  I know this is the Internet, but try harder.  *Starts drinking*

 

5th line: *continues drinking*

 

6th line and Beyond!:  If you extrapolate the law of the Jungle, we shouldn't live in cities, arguing on the Internet.  All of Human progress has been made by banding together in our own self interest.  The parade of technology and reasoning has happened against the backdrop of "Thats not how we did it before!"  Giordano Bruno was tried for herasy for saying our Sun was but one star of many, and that other stars may support worlds of life.  The "Rule of the Jungle" would've proclaimed that the Church was right in burning him at the stake because the Church was stronger.

 

Your vaunted "Traditional Values" proclaim everyone's intrinsic worth.  We have beaten evolution.  Where do we go from here?



Tankette #92 Posted May 04 2014 - 20:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 7851 battles
  • 4,463
  • Member since:
    02-21-2011

View PostJagermech, on May 04 2014 - 19:52, said:

 

I'ma take this sentence by sentence, I got nothing to do today.

 

1st line:  You are correct in saying traditional values were the solution humanity has used before.  Thats the definition of traditional.  The disconnect is where you think traditional values are homogenous.  Slavery has be used by humanity for thousands of years.  It is a "traditional value" according to you're definition, but I suspect that you're not advocating we conquer and enslave weaker nations, despite this being tradition.  Dunno what you are going on about with the evolution quip, considering the science behind evolutionary theory is a relatively new concept.

 

2nd line:  You are correct that most christian sects believe in Social Justice, which is considered a liberal ideal these days, but I'm not sure why you think progressives don't believe in God.  I mean, I do, and I'm a liberal because I do, so yeah, wrong there.

3rd line:  Your so-called "Slave Morality" is what Jesus preached.  Deal with it.:glasses:  I think the problem you're having is the whole "liberals cant belive in God" bit, while the folks I know belive in quite a few things, from the Abrahamic religions to Paganism to Humanism. (And, naturally, everything I haven't mentioned as well)

 

4th line:  That is literally the most insane reading of "God is Dead" I have ever heard.  I know this is the Internet, but try harder.  *Starts drinking*

 

5th line: *continues drinking*

 

6th line and Beyond!:  If you extrapolate the law of the Jungle, we shouldn't live in cities, arguing on the Internet.  All of Human progress has been made by banding together in our own self interest.  The parade of technology and reasoning has happened against the backdrop of "Thats not how we did it before!"  Giordano Bruno was tried for herasy for saying our Sun was but one star of many, and that other stars may support worlds of life.  The "Rule of the Jungle" would've proclaimed that the Church was right in burning him at the stake because the Church was stronger.

 

Your vaunted "Traditional Values" proclaim everyone's intrinsic worth.  We have beaten evolution.  Where do we go from here?

You know you are just feeding this troll, right? :/

Sigh. Based on his past posts, he would advocate slavery in a heartbeat. 



Huey_Long #93 Posted May 04 2014 - 20:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 24571 battles
  • 14,334
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

Pros: Chest thingies

Cons: Chest thingies

 

Did this answer question, OP?

I am Lacey and I have chest thingies and I'm not different than some men.

So yeah.



Comrade_Catastrophe #94 Posted May 04 2014 - 20:36

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 1204 battles
  • 792
  • Member since:
    12-18-2013

"Do you believe in Equality?"

 

Thats the great thing about human rights. It doesn't matter if you believe in them or not - they're still human rights.



Tankette #95 Posted May 04 2014 - 20:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 7851 battles
  • 4,463
  • Member since:
    02-21-2011

View PostComrade_Catastrophe, on May 04 2014 - 20:36, said:

"Do you believe in Equality?"

 

Thats the great thing about human rights. It doesn't matter if you believe in them or not - they're still human rights.

I believe in them.

For example, even though we may not agree on some things (ponies, for example), I would still treat you like a human being.

You don't want to treat others as your equal? Fine, I won't treat you as an equal.

And for my response to the OP, I don't know about you, but I believe that other than different sexual organs, a slight difference in hormones, and one different chromosome, we really are the same, mentally and emotionally. Many people put us in the same species for a reason.



Scootalove #96 Posted May 04 2014 - 21:24

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 15781 battles
  • 873
  • [ERAD] ERAD
  • Member since:
    05-06-2011

View PostTankette, on May 04 2014 - 13:23, said:

You know you are just feeding this troll, right? :/

Sigh. Based on his past posts, he would advocate slavery in a heartbeat. 

 

Like I said, I got nothing else to do today. :teethhappy:  I'm mostly surprised this topics still going.



nuclearguy931 #97 Posted May 04 2014 - 21:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 82099 battles
  • 10,936
  • [UMM] UMM
  • Member since:
    08-16-2011

 

Simple.

 

I bring home the coin, she spends the coin.



LordSerb #98 Posted May 05 2014 - 02:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 8789 battles
  • 2,431
  • [WASHD] WASHD
  • Member since:
    09-18-2013

View PostInnerworld, on Apr 24 2014 - 01:36, said:

Obviously not talking about physical characteristics.

 

Mentally, how do you feel male and females are different?

What have you observed them do differently?

In your own opinion, what are the pro and cons of each gender?

Do you believe in equality?



mattwong #99 Posted May 05 2014 - 03:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 30470 battles
  • 17,333
  • Member since:
    03-03-2012

View PostComrade_Catastrophe, on May 04 2014 - 15:36, said:

"Do you believe in Equality?"

 

Thats the great thing about human rights. It doesn't matter if you believe in them or not - they're still human rights.

 

Actually, human rights are an idea that we created because we hoped that they would lead a positive outcome.  They do not have any sort of innate existence, and indeed, mankind struggled along for thousands of years with no concept of "rights" until philosophers came up with the idea during the Enlightenment Era.

 

Human rights are justified by the fact that societies which respect them tend to be happier and more prosperous than societies which don't.  They can be thought of as a social engineering idea, which was tested under real-world conditions and found to be fairly effective.



mattwong #100 Posted May 05 2014 - 03:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 30470 battles
  • 17,333
  • Member since:
    03-03-2012

View PostTankette, on May 04 2014 - 15:23, said:

You know you are just feeding this troll, right? :/

Sigh. Based on his past posts, he would advocate slavery in a heartbeat. 

 

Exactly.  That guy has said some really strange (and offensive) things in the past, and anyone who says "traditional values do justify themselves" cannot be taken seriously.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users