On 19 Jan 2005 at 11:53, Tara Cleveland wrote: > <snip> > > Why is it so unacceptable to recognize that perhaps *some* of the > > differences in aptitude might be biochemical as opposed to being due > > to women's oppression of men? > (I'm assuming you meant men's oppression of women ;-) Well, no, actually, I meant women's oppression of men. Traditionally, the master has worn silk and jewels, while the slave does heavy, dirty, dangerous and unpleasant work. The reason why women, as a rule, earn 70 cents on the dollar for men is because, as a rule, you don't get paid for what you do, you get paid for what you put up with. In the 18th century, men and women had similar lifespans; she tended to die in childbirth and he died in industrial accidents. We've made childbirth pretty safe, but ignored his working conditions. When a man and a woman commit crimes together, you often hear that the prosecutor offers to let the woman get off scot-free if the man pleads guilty and takes a prison term. I've never heard of a deal being offered where she goes to prison for him; have you? If a woman doesn't want the responsibility of a baby, she can give the baby up for adoption. If a man doesn't want responsibility, he can go fish. When a neighbor calls the cops on a domestic dispute, two times out of three, the cops find a woman attacking a man. > Well, it could be because there is a history of *very* strong > discrimination in the fields of science and engineering. I can testify to that. When I was in Chemical Engineering at UD, there were six fellas and one womanl. She not only got the *highest* offer, but she got seventeen of them; the six guys combined had eleven offers. The previous year, there were seven men and one woman. The highest offer that year went to a woman, too. > See > http://archives.cbc.ca/IDD-1-70-398/disasters_tragedies/ > montreal_massacre/ for an extreme example of this attitude. That too. Once in a while, you find a slave revolt. > It could be that I've heard totally sexist and demeaning things said > to me in the course of my work countless times No doubt. Everyone seems to get assaulted in that manner, male or female. So why is it different when offensive sexual jibes are made to women than to men? I don't think *anyone* should have to "shut up and take it like a man." But men are taught at their mother's knees that their only reason to exist is to support and serve. It starts with sexual mutilation at birth, something that's considered barbaric when it happens to females, and as he grows up he learns that it's not proper to hit back when girls hit him. As as adult, he learns that "if you play, you pay" - but only if you're male; females get a tax-free income stream for 18 years if the joy of sex turns fruitful. > When we get rid of all that discrimination, sexism and nastiness, well, > maybe then you can start telling women it's all in their heads. Actually, he was saying it was structural, rather than psychological. I was for the ERA, but most everything else always sounds like "all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others" deke -- AmishHosting.Com Lots of space. Lots of bandwidth. Lots of speed. Lots of reliability. Lots of support. Lots of preinstalled scripts. Not a lot of money.