Re: Harvard Pres: Women Lack Ability In Math, Sciences

From: Andre Lieven (dg411_at_FreeNet.Carleton.CA)
Date: 01/18/05 

Date: 18 Jan 2005 22:19:07 GMT

"George" (george@wtfiswrongwithyou.com) writes:
> "Ian" <drawnai@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1106077662.717306.258360@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> As it happens I support freedom of choice for women. If they actually
>> wish to be barefoot and pregnant, then it's not your role to prevent
>> it.
>
> Nor is it any other man's role.

What of Feminists who claim that being a wife is " oppression " ?

> Nor is it anyone's role to tell a woman that she can't
> work (or whether she wants to or not), drive a car, or do anything
> else that any other citizen has a right to do.

So ? Thats not what was at issue in this matter. Rather, the dean
was speaking of *empirical research* that showed that men and
women are NOT the same, in this area of academe.

Speaking of a thing *isn't* " discrimination ".

> The fact is that this is no longer the 19th century.

So ? Feminism was of the 20th Century, and it's not that century,
anymore, either.

> The fact is that in most families it takes both spouses to make ends meet.

Sure. In no small part due to the inflation and wage deflation due to
the flooding of the job market by all those " liberated " women.

Choices. Consequences. Suck it up.

> Now, you can blame part of that on the government if you like,
> but much of the reason for this is because our standards of living
> have changed, as well as our economies.

See above.

> More and more people are vying for fewer and fewer resources.

Yeah, that would explain why folks today have many, many more power
sucking " labour savings " devices. Because we're all chasing fewer
things, which cost more... Priced a TV or a computer, lately ?
<laughs>

> It was bound to happen sooner of later. We live in a
> free society. That freedom should apply to all, including women.

And, including *men*, too...
 
>> (Prozac (and equivalent,) prescription is at record levels in the UK,
>> because government taxation policy is forcing women who aren't designed
>> to work, to work. I'm all for women who wish to work working, but
>> unlike the Chancellor, whose role in life is to boost the money supply,
>> I actually care about women. My five closest humans are all female.)
>
> "Aren't designed"? Are you going to tell me that you have the blueprints
> for how womens' minds work? Could you pass them on to the rest of us
> poor slobs?

Read some neurology...

> Curious minds would like to know. lol

Lie proven.
 
>> Our Patricia Hewitt says she's for women, but she's been in power for 7
>> years now, and all I see she's done for women, is force them to work,
>> and get them to believe that her handing back a small proportion of the
>> tax she's taking from them, is actually doing something for them.
>>
>> Blackmailing women into the workforce by giving them back some of the
>> tax you've stolen from them, ISN'T doing anything for the vast vast
>> vast proportion of women.
>
> Ok, first of all, I haven't "stolen" anything, and am certainly not the
> government.

So ? This isn't all about you, as shocking an idea as that is to you...

> Secondly, how is Patricia Hewitt "blackmailing" women into doing
> anything? Does she have some raunchy dirt about British women that
> keeps them in the workforce? Oh, by the way, men take prozac too.

So ? Aside from children, IOW, boys, forced to take it, who
takes *more* ?

Uh huh. Just more George cow***.

Andre 

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
                                    The Man Prayer, Red Green.
Quantcast