Don't have time right now to think up an answer, but if you want to read an interesting book on the subject, find Carol Tavris The Mismeasure of woman (I own a copy if you want to borrow, but it's enough of a classic that it should be available thru libraries
( ... )
The female reproductive system is way more complex, and prone to error/disease than the male system. This is not a bias issue, just a fact of human nature. Sex - men can ejaculate in a woman and walk away. The woman has a complex 9 month process after sex (if pregnancy occurs). Many STDs are almost symptom free for men, but very painful/damaging for women. These facts are not the fault of the medical profession. Notwithstanding any amount of PC propaganda, woman have more risks related to sex. Therefore they need to take more precautions. This is not 'fair', but it has always been true.
We're on the same page, though I would have phrased things differntly.
Differing sexual parts mean men and women are subject to differnt STDs, though the bulk of STDs are pretty much the same for men and women as sex is only a medium of transfer (think: HIV). There are also plenty of non-STD diseases which are gender unique (prostrate cancer, and such), most of which seem based around the sexual organs from what little I know.
In terms of the contest, I think I'll toss this one out for having "direct involvement in reproduction", so no cookies for you this time, unless I make an extra batch.
I've not heard of The Mismeasure of Woman before, but I like your description of it. I'm also pretty sure the title is joking about The Measure of a Man, which is the first solid hard science book on Egonomics (lots of numbers and stuff).
The Amazon.com reviews make it sound like she goes overboard, but if she's got lots of reliable facts, I think I'll add it to my next Amazon Purchase. I trust your reviews over theirs, so it's already in my Amazon shopping cart.
Saddly, the commercial was on a ReaplyTv show, so it got deleted after I watched it. If I see it again, I'll rip it to my hard drive and ask how you'd like it sent
( ... )
Cookies! Wooooooot! As soon as I'm back on sugar. (You've got a little time. But I'm back on bread now, so watch out world! Here she comes!)
I was hoping that the study might count, being a totally different sort of statistic. As I recall, it was as independent of social training as possible, and was a cross-cultural study. I could be misremembering, though. Must make time tomorrow to dig it up... But tonight I'm going to bed. I have to be at work early tomorrow. It's Field Day, and I pulled the short straw in deciding who gets to wait for the Port-a-Potty delivery folks at 7:45. Alas.
As for the non-straight couples ad campaign, it's not a TV commercial. It's a poster series. I've seen them in the T and in my doctor's office. I don't remember who sponsored them, though.
That result of the study is a generalization, which is basically a statistic without bothering to mention numbers [ex: most = "more than 50%"]. But, you're prettier than Gavin, so you get cookies.
That type behaviour is a well known conditioned responce to an instinct to protect the biological children environmentally [ref: Cinderella]. Women are more likely to go out of their way to make the step children suffer emotionally. Men are more likely to make them suffer physically. Both of these method sets are dictated by society and very retrainable [think "proven Mafioso techniques"].
If the study was a good one, they'll show the results are territorial along social lines.
The result sounds very much like well known information. I wonder how they phrased the grant application.
Comments 8
Reply
Sex - men can ejaculate in a woman and walk away. The woman has a complex 9 month process after sex (if pregnancy occurs). Many STDs are almost symptom free for men, but very painful/damaging for women. These facts are not the fault of the medical profession.
Notwithstanding any amount of PC propaganda, woman have more risks related to sex. Therefore they need to take more precautions. This is not 'fair', but it has always been true.
Reply
Differing sexual parts mean men and women are subject to differnt STDs, though the bulk of STDs are pretty much the same for men and women as sex is only a medium of transfer (think: HIV). There are also plenty of non-STD diseases which are gender unique (prostrate cancer, and such), most of which seem based around the sexual organs from what little I know.
In terms of the contest, I think I'll toss this one out for having "direct involvement in reproduction", so no cookies for you this time, unless I make an extra batch.
Reply
The Amazon.com reviews make it sound like she goes overboard, but if she's got lots of reliable facts, I think I'll add it to my next Amazon Purchase. I trust your reviews over theirs, so it's already in my Amazon shopping cart.
Reply
Reply
Reply
I was hoping that the study might count, being a totally different sort of statistic. As I recall, it was as independent of social training as possible, and was a cross-cultural study. I could be misremembering, though. Must make time tomorrow to dig it up... But tonight I'm going to bed. I have to be at work early tomorrow. It's Field Day, and I pulled the short straw in deciding who gets to wait for the Port-a-Potty delivery folks at 7:45. Alas.
As for the non-straight couples ad campaign, it's not a TV commercial. It's a poster series. I've seen them in the T and in my doctor's office. I don't remember who sponsored them, though.
Reply
That result of the study is a generalization, which is basically a statistic without bothering to mention numbers [ex: most = "more than 50%"]. But, you're prettier than Gavin, so you get cookies.
That type behaviour is a well known conditioned responce to an instinct to protect the biological children environmentally [ref: Cinderella]. Women are more likely to go out of their way to make the step children suffer emotionally. Men are more likely to make them suffer physically. Both of these method sets are dictated by society and very retrainable [think "proven Mafioso techniques"].
If the study was a good one, they'll show the results are territorial along social lines.
The result sounds very much like well known information. I wonder how they phrased the grant application.
Reply
Leave a comment