Females


Ad: Buy Girls Und Panzer Merch from Play Asia!
Status
Not open for further replies.

wittyfox

→√wittyfox=god Since god²=ME
Retired
I would like to start a open discussion on females. I am talking about personal opinions on females, basically your own views. I would like to stay away from general ideas like chivalry, feminineness, and ideas you feel every person in the world should accept. I find most of those ideas quite arrogant, even the ones that claim every female in the world should be respected.
I would like to keep this particularly on females and not males, but of course it would be really hard not to speak about males when speaking about females.

If you don't know where to begin a couple questions to ask your self are

How are females treated where you live

Does your society go out its way to place restrictions on them, if so could that signify
males feeling threaten

Does the lack of restrictions really signify freedom or just a life style change. ( for example, females in America are able to wear smaller, tighter things more so in other places in the world. However if you really think about it, the females in America still wear the general clothes a female is thought to should wear. For example, Dress, mini skirt, shorts, pants, blouse ect., its almost as if society still has a hand in what a female wears its just a hidden influence)

Or basic stuff like conversations, walking, flirting, nagging, tomboys, dress or pants blah blah.

Edit by me
 
QUOTE (wittyfox @ Sep 19 2007, 10:22 PM) Not gender roles or how they as a general group should be treated.

--------


If you don't know where to begin a couple questions to ask your self are

How are females treated where you live

Does your society go out its way to place restrictions on them, if so could that signify males feeling threaten
Wait a minute ... aren't those questions related to gender roles and how women are/should be treated??
huh.gif


I'm not really sure where you want to go with this thread, or at least, if it fits in the "thoughtful section" if it's just chatter about females and "conversations, walking, flirting, nagging, tomboys, dress or pants, etc"
 
... females are males. Just with boobs and no penis.

Honestly, there's not much of a difference to me between females and males; I don't discriminate. Females think a bit differently than most males, but that's about it, to me.

Though, if they're too tomboyish, they get called dykes. Grr. Oh well.
 
QUOTE Wait a minute ... aren't those questions related to gender roles and how women are/should be treated?? huh.gif

I'm not really sure where you want to go with this thread, or at least, if it fits in the "thoughtful section" if it's just chatter about females and "conversations, walking, flirting, nagging, tomboys, dress or pants, etc"

sorry I shouldnt have been so confusing. I want thoughtful observations, personal views basically. I just didnt want spam

Actually I would think you, being a female, would have lots of things to talk about, or maybe its just a second thought to you....
tongue.gif
 
could i start by saying - we arent very much physically different from men really (minus the whole breasts/penis thing) - we're just different in our thought processes. Personal observations about females? if they seem like ice-queens it doesnt mean they're impossible to reach - it just means that you have to be very careful with them. usually the more a girl plays 'hard to get' usually means she really doesnt want to be caught. the reason for this is because we fear pain, we fear being hurt. the only ones not 'playing' this are mature and strong enough to forget about playing with feelings.
girls, playing hard to get always gets the guy's attention but please remember how much mixed signals you're sending when doing that. guys go "oh, its alright to do that even if she said no, because she actually wants it." its not true.

the 'lack of restrictions' is a bunch of bull. if anything the restrictions on us has grown tighter - because we (females) make them to be. sure we can wear mini skirts and tiny tops that are two sizes too small but that puts a whole lot more restrictions on us. we have to be careful with who we go out with, where we go etc etc etc and if by lack of restrictions mean we can be liberal with our sexuality (i mean in giving it) it'll just end us being labled as sluts. so no, we seem to have more freedom/liberty but its just all an illusion. As females we are expected to hold some kind of moral ground, so yes its great to have all this 'freedom' but we have to be careful how much of this 'freedom' we use. too much and it'll be detrimental to ourselves.

@witty: is this something you're after?
 
QUOTE (Yuki Shiido @ Sep 19 2007, 08:43 PM) ... females are males. Just with boobs and no penis.

a funny observation, except it is the other way around. Every fetus starts off as female, but at some stage of development the Y chromosome kicks in and the female fetus turns into a male one.
tongue.gif


Just a side idea I had after reading that introductory sentense.

Well, as for the differences. There are differences, undeniable differences. What I dont understand is the fuss everybody (=society and researches) do about it. So what? So we think differently, that doesnt make the females or males any better, just different. It also makes me wonder, why males in pretty much in every society think, that they are something superior. Is it because of the muscle power? I mean it is proven scientifically, that females are no less intelligent than males. So what makes guys think, that they are something better? Now that is a question, that makes my brain smoke.
laugh.gif
 
females are actually more intelligent
wink.gif
and i think its due to the testosterone that they have this 'i'm smarter/better/greater than everyone else' attitude XD and i suppose its due to what the norm was for males since milienias ago >.< like they were supposed to be stronger because they got the food, protected the family etc etc etc but yeah, i dont think males and females are any better than one another. without one there wont be the other >.<
 
QUOTE really don't see what is so different about us because we're "the other gender". While we have physical similarities, we're all individuals the same as men.

Well if you consider being able to have a child just a slight difference then yeah your right. I think the problem lies in the fact nature places a big responsibility on females to begin with. Her whole life seems to be built around having a baby and then being able to take care of it. For males its getting a women pregnant, I think it starts and stops there. Once she is pregnant its really up to social norms if the males stays around or leaves to move on. You can see that in the "wild" some animals stick together forever some just mate and leave. Of course some could just be built to
want to stick around and find little purpose in randomly matting over and over.


QUOTE the 'lack of restrictions' is a bunch of bull. if anything the restrictions on us has grown tighter - because we (females) make them to be. sure we can wear mini skirts and tiny tops that are two sizes too small but that puts a whole lot more restrictions on us. we have to be careful with who we go out with, where we go etc etc etc and if by lack of restrictions mean we can be liberal with our sexuality (i mean in giving it) it'll just end us being labled as sluts. so no, we seem to have more freedom/liberty but its just all an illusion. As females we are expected to hold some kind of moral ground, so yes its great to have all this 'freedom' but we have to be careful how much of this 'freedom' we use. too much and it'll be detrimental to ourselves.
I actaully really like this opinion. I find people often looking down on places like the middle east that usaully place really high restrictions on females. I find that weird since I could barely see the difference. A fine balance of when to conform or when to be different is still played out in other places.


QUOTE and i suppose its due to what the norm was for males since milienias ago >.< like they were supposed to be stronger because they got the food, protected the family etc etc etc but yeah, i dont think males and females are any better than one another. without one there wont be the other >.<

Females actaully recently was placed in the role of care giver, and also just recently decided that wasn't good enough still. In hunter-gatherer societies, women were generally the gatherers of plant foods, small animal foods, fish, and learned to use dairy products, while men hunted meat from large animals. Which makes sense, since males are usaully better built for such work.

It seems to me females are defined by their ever changing attitudes towards their selfs and social norms placed on them. This seem interesting to me since males dont seem to go through as drastic changes as females do. Males just feel superior, just because, but is it just a delusion and the outcome of the natural superiority of females. Maybe if a male feels in control, he is more willing to mate?
 
okay, so you want to talk about how females are treated differently, other than in terms of gender specific actions...

well...they can have babies. i think that about covers it.
 
QUOTE (wittyfox @ Sep 20 2007, 09:00 AM)Well if you consider being able to have a child just a slight difference then yeah your right.
I don't really think of it in terms of "having a child". There are women who cannot have children, so I think it's a generalization to categorize us as "people who can have children". Does that mean, if I'm incapable of having a child, I'm no longer considered a woman? Maybe in the past, I would be discarded as useless because men wanted someone who could produce an heir, but I don't think that is relevant in American society today.

I would look at it more that we have different bodies, and therefore different experiences.


QUOTE (wittyfox @ Sep 20 2007, 09:00 AM)Females actaully recently was placed in the role of care giver, and also just recently decided that wasn't good enough still.

I'm curious about your wording here ... "that wasn't good enough"? Well, why should anything be good enough if society is saying "men and women are completely equal". And care giver is rather broad ... do you mean, staying home and looking after children? Going out and making the big dollars to support the children?

I was learning in lecture today about matriarchal native societies in the eastern maritime regions. Men married into the family, and their main role was hunting, protection, and reproduction. The "chiefs" of the clan were selected by the "clan mothers" to represent them, and if the women became unhappy with how he represented them, he lost his role. Also, the children did not look to their father as an authority figure because he came from outside the family. Instead, an uncle (direct clan relative) would be the authority figure for his sister's children.
 
QUOTE I don't really think of it in terms of "having a child". There are women who cannot have children, so I think it's a generalization to categorize us as "people who can have children". Does that mean, if I'm incapable of having a child, I'm no longer considered a woman? Maybe in the past, I would be discarded as useless because men wanted someone who could produce an heir, but I don't think that is relevant in American society today.

I would look at it more that we have different bodies, and therefore different experiences.

But the cases of females who can have children and those that can not doesn't even come close. A womens bodies has all to do with having a child. That is why it is different, what would a male need with ovaries and what would a female need with a penis. Now a person considering her self not a women based on the fact she cant have children I think is a misunderstanding on her part. For me she still is a women and her body is still built like a women even if she cant reproduce.

QUOTE
I'm curious about your wording here ... "that wasn't good enough"? Well, why should anything be good enough if society is saying "men and women are completely equal". And care giver is rather broad ... do you mean, staying home and looking after children? Going out and making the big dollars to support the children?
Yes I was broad on the term "care giver." I was referring to taking care of the children at home, more domestic. Even so thats nothing to frown at. The women is with the children, the children being the "future," the women basically has the ultimate control over their possibile out come of a nation.
I might sound rude when I say "that wasn't good enough" but thats how I feel. I cant understand this want for equality, it seems almost based on resentment. It doesn't seem to have any end to it "you do that, I do that, you do this, I do this too" Like a race to nowhere. Men and women cant possibly be equal until we stop trying to make them equal. When we start respecting females and males for who they are, there would be no need to have to out do anyone or prove a womens worth.
While society says we are all equal, it still allows for parents to treat boys and girls different. For example, blue for boys and pink for girls or dump trucks and toy guns over Barbie dolls and make up. Though that doesn't apply to EVERY child I think you can agree those standards are still there.


QUOTE I was learning in lecture today about matriarchal native societies in the eastern maritime regions. Men married into the family, and their main role was hunting, protection, and reproduction. The "chiefs" of the clan were selected by the "clan mothers" to represent them, and if the women became unhappy with how he represented them, he lost his role. Also, the children did not look to their father as an authority figure because he came from outside the family. Instead, an uncle (direct clan relative) would be the authority figure for his sister's children.

Thats interesting, I never heard of that society before. To me that makes sense, and would seem like it works. But still it goes against the standards of equal rights, if the women were treated the same I would bet many people would feel angry at such a society. As you can see I don't care either way, and have no reason to downgrade a female to just something to have or keep at home.


QUOTE
okay, so you want to talk about how females are treated differently, other than in terms of gender specific actions...

well...they can have babies. i think that about covers it.

I don't like spam....it annoys me
 
wittyfox dono

You said, that women feel like their role as raising children wanst good enough and now they feel resentment.
I think you got that wrong. It is not that women dont like the house chores and they dont like having children. The problem ist, that BEACAUSE OF THIS, they have been looked down by males. Not so long time ago women were assigned the role of a quiet, obedient, children raising idiot..... and I purposely used the word idiot, because thats how men used to look at their wives. So of course a woman feels resentment, when males try to push her into that position again.
Or let me explain it this way. If women were cherished and respected...... and I mean really respected for the work they do in household and treated as equals by their husbands...... they would probably still be cooking and taking care of babies. But women realised, that the only way to be accepted by males as equals is to become like them and they fight for this position and along the way they have forgotten for what reason they were doing it...... it seems.
 
until we move on from the current "dominator paradigm," women will be viewed as having less authority then men. why? because the dominator paradigm thrives on hierarchy, even between genders (men being "A", women being "Not A" in the vast majority of cultures).

where does this originate you ask? well, one hypothesis I've heard from my anthropology prof. is that because of their on average greater physical strength (and not being possibly weighed down by a child in the womb/needing to be near the breasts for milk), that males were the ones that hunted large game. while females provided the vast majority of food, the food that men provided (on the rare occasions they did manage to get something) was considered to be of much higher quality (quality= lots of fat and protein).
 
QUOTE (wittyfox @ Sep 20 2007, 05:27 PM) what would a male need with ovaries and what would a female need with a penis.

For me she still is a women and her body is still built like a women even if she cant reproduce.
I think that is good articulation. But I still don't think women's bodies are "all about having a child". I'm guessing this may be a different of view based on gender. To you, we are "different" because our bodies are capable of having children. But to us, it's the other way around. Maybe. It's hard to say how everyone views their bodies. It's not really an important point, because we basically do agree.

As for the rest ... I see points on both sides I agree with. But I don't really see this as "the role of caregiver not being good enough". Women were oppressed. The oppression has been slowly decreasing over the past century or so, but it's a fact. Why should women be forced to stay at home with the children? Why can't a man do his share of the household chores? Women have interests and passions the same as men - why can't we pursue them as a career?

There are some people who will take it to an extreme. But I think most women just want to be treated as equals, in that they get the same pay rate as men and have the same opportunities. There are certain restrictions that yes, it is hard to break. I remember once reading about how most women can't pass the fire-fighter exams because of the physical demands. Is that wrong? I don't really think so, because it concerns her safety as well as the people she needs to save. But if I'm smart enough to make it through med-school ... why shouldn't I be allowed to practice as a doctor? Because it interferes with "having children"? That's just ... stupid.


But everyone will have their opinions ... I just hate the idea that my body and my life are all about having children, raising children, etc. And it's nothing about being a feminist, or anything like that.
 
I'll be honest, I didn't even consider about thinking of women who can only give birth and raise children as being their only role.

Well, it may be just an idea, but maybe it's a historical influence on us, considering that men were put first. But even so, I agree on Chiisai's behalf. Some of those barriers are pretty much small but effective excuses. Even if they can get a job that men can get, there are usually drawbacks to it.

On that note, Chiisai's pretty much right on about men having to at least share an equal amount of caring and doing some household stuffs for his whole family. I live in such that my mom used to have to cut back her hours just to stay with me and my sisters, and my dad goes off to work to pay for the rent and such. But what annoys me the most is the fact that they're working for money that's being spent for our rooftops. I don't even see my father until a half hour before I go to sleep. Being a caring parent is one thing, but parenting is another, and the males really need to take part for the whole thing.

But that aside, would other females think the same way? This is from a male perspective, but could they have really ventured afar from being a household wife and still maintain their care?
 
QUOTE
samthebear-dono
if anything the restrictions on us has grown tighter - because we (females) make them to be. sure we can wear mini skirts and tiny tops that are two sizes too small but that puts a whole lot more restrictions on us.


Just a question: To wear something which reveals a little something from your body (miniskirts etc) what satisfaction gives YOU? Just a little curious but very serious. (I am not attacking or anything, just need to know. After all we discuss something, aren't we?). All right, I can understand the summer days, when the temperature is in its heights, but I like to know some reasons BEHIND that...
NOTE: I am not a burgha-lover...



QUOTE
samthebear-dono
As females we are expected to hold some kind of moral ground, so yes its great to have all this 'freedom' but we have to be careful how much of this 'freedom' we use. too much and it'll be detrimental to ourselves.

Normally, everyone has to keep some moral grounds, no matter what gender is he/she. Yes, you are right! Too much, (or if you wish too little) of almost anything gets us out of the road. Freedom, or 'freedom' is one of these.



QUOTE
warita200-DaiYoukai
I mean it is proven scientifically, that females are no less intelligent than males. So what makes guys think, that they are something better? Now that is a question, that makes my brain smoke. laugh.gif

Have you consider that the most of the males just did what they did because they realized their weakness? Just a possibility...


QUOTE
hamasusuke-aniki
I'll be honest, I didn't even consider about thinking of women who can only give birth and raise children as being their only role.


You are correct. But there are still plenty of people thinking that a female's role is to birth and raise children ONLY (and satisfy the "needs" of the male).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyway, for more info about the differences of males and females you can read Allan and Barbara Pease's books (there are other writers too).
 
QUOTE (AncientMariner @ Sep 23 2007, 04:52 PM) You are correct. But there are still plenty of people thinking that a female's role is to birth and raise children ONLY

Many of womens would satisfact if men earns money and they would have only to look up after childrens.

QUOTE (AncientMariner @ Sep 23 2007, 04:52 PM)(and satisfy the "needs" of the male).
Yes, the reason why males go with females in relastionship is sex. That's the reality: women's loves with heart man's with the lower one.
 
Hi. Read the following quote:



QUOTE These are the ground rules for this section

- Any opinion is fair game as long as you support it with arguments.

- Normal forum rules also apply. Check HERE for details


Now read the last few posts and ask yourself; Are You Following The Ground Rules Of This Section? If yes, you may ignore this portion of this post and carry on. Otherwise, you are to start supporting your arguments.



QUOTE (warita)a funny observation, except it is the other way around. Every fetus starts off as female, but at some stage of development the Y chromosome kicks in and the female fetus turns into a male one.

Funny observation indeed, based on this observation; some may assume that males are superior to females. Theoritically, what you have just mentioned is, "As female fetus evolve they become male fetus." and that is equavilent to saying "Men are just like women, but they're advanced and developed a little more than women, that's all."



QUOTE ("warita")Not so long time ago women were assigned the role of a quiet, obedient, children raising idiot..... and I purposely used the word idiot, because thats how men used to look at their wives. So of course a woman feels resentment, when males try to push her into that position again.
*gives a big hug to warita and pats her head* I have no idea where you have gotten that idea from. But in many "great civilizations" women were not treated as you imagine. In some cases, they were considered Gods (Queens, Empresses). At times, they were used to predict future, to see beyond what is presented.


QUOTE ("warita")If women were cherished and respected
I'm assuming that you are implying that in some cases, women are not cherished and respected, correct? Well, can't we say the same exact opposite about men? Some husbands are not cherished AND OR respected by their wives. I think the variables involved in this problem are not just limited to gender, but other factors such as age, environment, situation, relationship, finance and etc.


QUOTE ("3rd")
I was learning in lecture today about matriarchal native societies in the eastern maritime regions. Men married into the family, and their main role was hunting, protection, and reproduction. The "chiefs" of the clan were selected by the "clan mothers" to represent them, and if the women became unhappy with how he represented them, he lost his role. Also, the children did not look to their father as an authority figure because he came from outside the family. Instead, an uncle (direct clan relative) would be the authority figure for his sister's children. Excellent example that proves my previous point(s).


QUOTE ("3rd")Why should women be forced to stay at home with the children? Why can't a man do his share of the household chores? Women have interests and passions the same as men - why can't we pursue them as a career?

I think you're generalizing things based on a limited samples and experiments that you have observed. From what I have seen, things are pretty equal; the probability of a child being taken care of by the mother or the father is 0.30 each and A Day Care Center of some sort is 0.60.


People are not treated equally, they are treated based on their value to the society/company that they live in/ work for. And their value increases based on their performance.
 
QUOTE (noob @ Sep 24 2007, 08:15 PM) *gives a big hug to warita and pats her head* I have no idea where you have gotten that idea from. But in many "great civilizations" women were not treated as you imagine. In some cases, they were considered Gods (Queens, Empresses). At times, they were used to predict future, to see beyond what is presented.
My assumption based on her "not so long ago" comment would be that we're talking 2-300 years ago, presumably European/North American society. What you seem to be referring to is more "ancient" societies. Now, that's not to say that in 1900 all women were completely oppressed, forced into horrible marriages to carry out the husband's will with absolutely no say. But what warita said has a solid backing. It wasn't really until the World Wars, with so many men overseas, that women began making up a significant part of the workforce. Even the 1950's "ideal family" typifies a woman who stays at home, cleaning and cooking and looking after her children.

So in respect to our own culture, I would say warita has a point. And of course, people of the upper class have always been exceptions. There might be a Queen, but that doesn't mean the average women would hold a role within government.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Playasia - Play-Asia.com: Online Shopping for Digital Codes, Video Games, Toys, Music, Electronics & more
Back
Top