Men Are Mentally Superior To Women

Without a doubt I'm certain that men overall are mentally superior to that of women.

There are more male philosophers, scientists, thinkers, innovators, and inventors.

I'm surprised that this anymore is even debated at all this point.

Men are by far more logical than that of women who constantly give into their emotions.

What are other people's opinions on all of this?

There is nothing of the sort that has thus provided to me otherwise.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

10 stars taken away :[

Now you're sounding like The Great Purple Dragon.

Generalizations can only go so far until you run out of stuff to take credit for that you never did...

Men have done this and that and blah blah yeah that's true, and I'm not denying that males tend to be that certain way but.....

Not always.

Because for every superior male over male (and this can come like night & day), there is a superior female right behind the most superior male.

Do you think your head came out of the opening of a dick-hole? :]]

The correction is....

Civilizations have produced men who have produced....


and follows....

The correction is...

Women have produced these men....

Poison IV wrote:

10 stars taken away :[

Now you're sounding like The Great Purple Dragon.

Generalizations can only go so far until you run out of stuff to take credit for that you never did...

Men have done this and that and blah blah yeah that's true, and I'm not denying that males tend to be that certain way but.....

Not always.

Because for every superior male over male (and this can come like night & day), there is a superior female right behind the most superior male.

Do you think your head came out of the opening of a dick-hole? :]]

Even the most smartest proficient intelligent woman is no competition to the most intelligent man.

Quote :

Do you think your head came out of the opening of a dick-hole? :]]

What does that have to do with anything?

Quote :

The correction is....

Civilizations have produced men who have produced....


and follows....

The correction is...

Women have produced these men....

Women have only given birth to them after themselves becoming fucked by men.

I find that based on my experience, men are just as fickle as women. Some are more likely to think logically, but even they still allow their emotions to colour their concepts and feel their way through arguments.

I think the man who has to declare that men are mentally superior to women, is mentally inferior to most other people. Period. This would be the case even if it was a woman who declared it.

Saying that most of throughout history it was men that did the good stuff, well, I don't think that it is a totally valid line of argumentation to suggest that men are inherently mentally superior to women, because women haven't had the same opportunities as men. And if you look at exam results, girls outpoint boys. But I guess that is not men and women, because men and women are concepts that apply to sexually mature humans.

What about an androgynous person? How do they fit on your scale?

This is just way too complicated for either of you to handle.

I should know.

I'm a woman.

Quote :

I think the man who has to declare that men are mentally superior to women, is mentally inferior to most other people. Period. This would be the case even if it was a woman who declared it.

My sentiments exactly.

TheJoker wrote:

Without a doubt I'm certain that men overall are mentally superior to that of women.

There are more male philosophers, scientists, thinkers, innovators, and inventors.

I'm surprised that this anymore is even debated at all this point.

Men are by far more logical than that of women who constantly give into their emotions.

What are other people's opinions on all of this?

There is nothing of the sort that has thus provided to me otherwise.

One has to ask though, what makes those particular things mentally superior. Would it not be mentally superior to be smart enough to manipulate the other into supplying everything for you? Beauty became beautiful because we associated the enjoyment we were provided by women with the physical appearance, they love of appearance didn't just pop out of no where, it was an ancient Pavlovian conditioning, that occurred over a long time of evolution.

TheJoker wrote:

Even the most smartest proficient intelligent woman is no competition to the most intelligent man.

When did you meat the most intelligent man...or the most intelligent woman?
And how can one decide that the self is proficient to recognize intelligence?

TheJoker wrote:

Women have only given birth to them after themselves becoming fucked by men.

Whats to say their are not women who enjoy the toying with their own emotions?

TheJoker wrote:

Without a doubt I'm certain that men overall are mentally superior to that of women.

There are more male philosophers, scientists, thinkers, innovators, and inventors.

I'm surprised that this anymore is even debated at all this point.

Men are by far more logical than that of women who constantly give into their emotions.

so giving in to emotions is negative? Do you judge yourself this way? Isn't this a place where you are aligned with psychiatry? Are not the emotions also us? Isn't there an assumption here that one's emotions and one's mind have different goals and cannot be unified?

One should revel in their emotions rather then falling into the socially conditioned (unintential-manipulation) of thinking that "A man doesn't cry." That has not always been the case anyways...

MonoExplosion wrote:

I find that based on my experience, men are just as fickle as women. Some are more likely to think logically, but even they still allow their emotions to colour their concepts and feel their way through arguments.

I think the man who has to declare that men are mentally superior to women, is mentally inferior to most other people. Period. This would be the case even if it was a woman who declared it.

Saying that most of throughout history it was men that did the good stuff, well, I don't think that it is a totally valid line of argumentation to suggest that men are inherently mentally superior to women, because women haven't had the same opportunities as men. And if you look at exam results, girls outpoint boys. But I guess that is not men and women, because men and women are concepts that apply to sexually mature humans.

What about an androgynous person? How do they fit on your scale?

Quote :

I find that based on my experience, men are just as fickle as women.

Here comes the egalitarian singing his politically correct bird song.

What rubbish.

Quote :

Some are more likely to think logically, but even they still allow their emotions to colour their concepts and feel their way through arguments.

Sure men are emotional too. I've never denied that men have emotions.

However what you will notice nonetheless is that men are by far more logical inducing than women and more knowledgeable. Accept it!

Quote :

I think the man who has to declare that men are mentally superior to women, is mentally inferior to most other people. Period. This would be the case even if it was a woman who declared it.

Oh look, a cute little yuppie liberal egalitarian cheap come back.

Does my impolitically correct proclivities hurt your well nurtured sensibilities?

Awww, too bad.....

Quote :

Saying that most of throughout history it was men that did the good stuff, well, I don't think that it is a totally valid line of argumentation to suggest that men are inherently mentally superior to women, because women haven't had the same opportunities as men.

If women ever mattered at all on the creativity ratio you would think they atleast would be able to catch up in competing with men when it concerns a great deal of intellectual items.

It's interesting that even now with lowering the bar by political correctness they for the most part lag behind that of men.

The thing is that even making it ascertainable to them doesn't much peak their interests because such is not the interests of women as they concern themselves with other things largely.

Quote :

And if you look at exam results, girls outpoint boys.

In what exactly?

Quote :

But I guess that is not men and women, because men and women are concepts that apply to sexually mature humans.

Here we go with sex as a cultural construct bullshit arguement.

Hey Satyr, I believe this is your favorite conversation piece. Want to chime in here?

Quote :

What about an androgynous person? How do they fit on your scale?

I would like your description of what androgyny is.

Quote :

Without Music: My sentiments exactly.

And the fuck nugget has his word in too.

For now on Without Music you will no longer be addressed as yuppie.

I shall address you as mangina for now on.

[Might even give you the title yuppie mangina.]

Feel privileged in this new nick name that I have assigned to you.

Quote :

Abstract: One has to ask though, what makes those particular things mentally superior. Would it not be mentally superior to be smart enough to manipulate the other into supplying everything for you? Beauty became beautiful because we associated the enjoyment we were provided by women with the physical appearance, they love of appearance didn't just pop out of no where, it was an ancient Pavlovian conditioning, that occurred over a long time of evolution.

For sure a woman is clever as she is deceptive at manipulating men with her beauty and flesh.

Yes I suppose it's a different kind of intelligence however it is nothing in the face of men's ingenuity and creativity.

Quote :

When did you meat the most intelligent man...or the most intelligent woman?
And how can one decide that the self is proficient to recognize intelligence?

Are you denying that men are better at a great deal of things than women?

Even the most intelligent woman would have to face that.

Quote :

Kovacs: so giving in to emotions is negative? Do you judge yourself this way? Isn't this a place where you are aligned with psychiatry? Are not the emotions also us? Isn't there an assumption here that one's emotions and one's mind have different goals and cannot be unified?

Never said that. Quit putting words and sentences in my mouth that I have not uttered.

I'm merely here stating that there is a variety of things that men dominate, excell, and are superior at over women.

Women and Minorities haven't had the luxery of going to the level that white males have. When they do philosophise, they have the imperative of dealing with just trying to be equal. This is why their philosophy tends to be more political.

Eventually, through the evolution of things, this will change.

One day there won't be such a distinction.


Women have already proven their ability to be geniuses:


Plath has certainly proved that.

And I would argue that Nicole Blackman has a kind of genius about her.

There are a few women and minorities whose shoulders I have had to stand on to become what I am.

d63tark wrote:

Women and Minorities haven't had the luxery of going to the level that white males have. When they do philosophise, they have the imperative of dealing with just trying to be equal. This is why their philosophy tends to be more political.

Eventually, through the evolution of things, this will change.

One day there won't be such a distinction.


Women have already proven their ability to be geniuses:


Plath has certainly proved that.

And I would argue that Nicole Blackman has a kind of genius about her.

Oh, this is fucking rich! Now it's the white caucasian male's fault for everything.

The shit they teach you fucktards in college these days.

Why do women as a whole fail to grasp intellectual subjects and partake in a variety of academical subjects that is dominated by men?

.....It's the white man's fault!...........

Don't worry sunny boy. Soon there won't be much of those pesky white males or people in general with population declines. When that happens you will have to start targeting Asian men instead as a alternative scapegoat.

List of shoulders I have had to stand on:

Sylvia Plath, John Lee Hooker, Muddy Waters, Nicole Blackman, Lauri Anderson, Barbara Ennerich, Addriene Rich, Malcom X, Joyce Carol Oates, Ann Sexton, Beth Nugent, rosalie waldrop, langston Hughs, Billie Holiday, Patsy Cline, Tricky, the chick in KMFDM, the hot chick in White Zombie, Prince, Cornell West is kind of cool and really upbeat, Toni Holiday from Curve, shit, Sheryl Crow who in her second album was one of the best lyricists there was at the time, Ani DiFranco, and I'm quite certain I could go on and on with women and minorities who have blown me away in the same way that any white male can.

At times, women have had a really important advantage.

The first thing to understand is that men, physically, tend to be awkward and ungainly. Women, on the other hand, tend to be physically beautiful. We're unlike any other species in that sense. Therefore, men have to work harder to be beautiful. This creates a dynamic in which women tend to deal with what is right in front of their nose while men want to rule the world.

You see this at parties. While women tend to talk about the immediate, men tend to engage in the bigger things. It tends to be men who are talking about politics and other big issues while women tend to talk about the day to day.

The strange thing about it is that this difference tends to give women a strange advantage in the arts. While women tend to stay close to the real, men are more prone to bigger statements which too often make them seem pretentious. The upswing of it is though, is that when men do actually hit they hit big. On the other hand, women do tend to hit in very real and natural ways. Aimmee Mann was a really good example of what I'm talking about. She was far less prone to the pretentiousness that men are.

As beautiful as much of the music of the 70's was, and male dominated, if you really look at it there was a lot of pretense:

Yes, Styx, even Led Zepplin.

Oh! I forgot Janis Joplin:


Lord! Won't you buy me...



A Mercedes Benz......................

This is a song of great social and political import....

That's it

ha..ha..,,ha

These are some of the worst arguments I've ever seen -_____-

On the one side we have Joker who needs to validate himself in the same way Purple Dragon does- because they have absolutely nothing else to show for their manhood.....

And on the other we have the defense of women and minorities etc as being less pronounced in the realms of science and industry because they have not been given enough opportunities -____-

They are both wrong.

To be able to fully understand why these events have taken place in history, you're gonna need to dig a hell of a lot deeper.

Poison IV wrote:

These are some of the worst arguments I've ever seen -_____-

On the one side we have Joker who needs to validate himself in the same way Purple Dragon does- because they have absolutely nothing else to show for their manhood.....

And on the other we have the defense of women and minorities etc as being less pronounced in the realms of science and industry because they have not been given enough opportunities -____-

They are both wrong.

To be able to fully understand why these events have taken place in history, you're gonna need to dig a hell of a lot deeper.

Quote :

On the one side we have Joker who needs to validate himself in the same way Purple Dragon does- because they have absolutely nothing else to show for their manhood.....

Fuck you bitch. Don't be upset because you can't muster a arguement or defense against my claims.

I'm done being nice to the women here who post a whole lot of nothing and call it philosophy through a woman's point of view.

The women at this forum only prove my example in that those here combined are about as smart as a bag of bricks.

The women here trying to pretend to philosophical I can't quite figure out yet if it is very pathetic or just plain amusing.

The gaunlet has been thrown. No more Mr. nice guy. Women here will get no special quarter from me in that just like everybody else I shall roast them over the fire as well.

Don't you have a drum circle to attend to in a park or ufo convention in Florida anyways Poison?

I'm pretty sure with that fake anarcho primitivist stance that you embrace with those designer clothes I see you wearing in about just every photo of yours that your the biggest walking contradiction which entirely displays a level of fakeness.

Next please!

I thought I already answered these but apparently not....either that or Poison deleted my post to get me back for writing over her messages on accident...anyways

TheJoker wrote:

Quote :

Abstract: One has to ask though, what makes those particular things mentally superior. Would it not be mentally superior to be smart enough to manipulate the other into supplying everything for you? Beauty became beautiful because we associated the enjoyment we were provided by women with the physical appearance, they love of appearance didn't just pop out of no where, it was an ancient Pavlovian conditioning, that occurred over a long time of evolution.

For sure a woman is clever as she is deceptive at manipulating men with her beauty and flesh.

Yes I suppose it's a different kind of intelligence however it is nothing in the face of men's ingenuity and creativity.

It is a different type of ingenuity and creativity.

TheJoker wrote:

Quote :

When did you meat the most intelligent man...or the most intelligent woman?
And how can one decide that the self is proficient to recognize intelligence?

Are you denying that men are better at a great deal of things than women?

Even the most intelligent woman would have to face that.

No, I'm just saying that women are better then a great deal of things than men.
But that is hard to tell sense so few generations of their freedom to show such have been witnessed...and so little time has been given to see them step past the past.

Why so... serious? Joker

Maybe women don't give a shit...because they are the ones that already realize it isn't all that serious....

Before we can answer this issue we have to know what is intelligent, before we can understand that we have to know why we exist and such so as to know what the best thing to do is, so we then can define what is fair to call "successful"

TheJoker wrote:

MonoExplosion wrote:

I find that based on my experience, men are just as fickle as women. Some are more likely to think logically, but even they still allow their emotions to colour their concepts and feel their way through arguments.

I think the man who has to declare that men are mentally superior to women, is mentally inferior to most other people. Period. This would be the case even if it was a woman who declared it.

Saying that most of throughout history it was men that did the good stuff, well, I don't think that it is a totally valid line of argumentation to suggest that men are inherently mentally superior to women, because women haven't had the same opportunities as men. And if you look at exam results, girls outpoint boys. But I guess that is not men and women, because men and women are concepts that apply to sexually mature humans.

What about an androgynous person? How do they fit on your scale?

Quote :

I find that based on my experience, men are just as fickle as women.

Here comes the egalitarian singing his politically correct bird song.

What rubbish.

Awesome argument. I am egalitarian, to the extent that I believe all people are equally worthless until proven otherwise. I don't generalise or apply categories to large groups of people like you do. I know it's hard to imagine a worldview that doesn't involve crass generalisations and ignorance as intrinsic cogs to its inner workings, but it is possible. It's called ground up thinking, and involves talking to people without bringing retarded concepts and conceits into the picture.

Quote :

Some are more likely to think logically, but even they still allow their emotions to colour their concepts and feel their way through arguments.

Sure men are emotional too. I've never denied that men have emotions.

However what you will notice nonetheless is that men are by far more logical inducing than women and more knowledgeable. Accept it![/quote]

That is not an argument, I don't just accept things because somebody declared them. What I notice, as opposed to what I will notice if I just ignore a lot of the experiences I have, is that it doesn't depend on the gender of a person how logical they are. I like to say that, despite a trend, there are always anomalies, which might just turn out to be the rule, rather than the exception. In otherwords, I don't look at people as man and woman first, but as person first, and then decide whether they are intelligent based on what they say (and my own understanding of intelligence). Not on what they have between their legs. It is possible to create a relationship between intelligence and gender, but you're gonna have to do a lot better than say "it just is" to prove it. Like, show me some charts, with labelled axes and numbers on it. Otherwise, I might think you're making an emotional argument with no logic behind it at all. Like how a woman might argue...

Quote :

Quote :

I think the man who has to declare that men are mentally superior to women, is mentally inferior to most other people. Period. This would be the case even if it was a woman who declared it.

Oh look, a cute little yuppie liberal egalitarian cheap come back.

Does my impolitically correct proclivities hurt your well nurtured sensibilities?

Awww, too bad.....

Actually, I just think you personally, are slightly more retarded than most women. Of course, because I say that one person is inferior to one other person, I must be egalitarian (do you know what that means?).. that is called, bad logic, Joker. You incorrectly inferred something about me based on your emotional feelings towards what I said. Just because men are not inherently mentally superior to women, and that somebody who says that they are is inherently inferior to men and women alike, doesn't make me an egalitarian. It just means that I value most other peoples' opinions over yours.

Quote :

Quote :

Saying that most of throughout history it was men that did the good stuff, well, I don't think that it is a totally valid line of argumentation to suggest that men are inherently mentally superior to women, because women haven't had the same opportunities as men.

If women ever mattered at all on the creativity ratio you would think they atleast would be able to catch up in competing with men when it concerns a great deal of intellectual items.

I'm not sure what you mean... Catch up like... You mean produce as many things as men have? I know this is a big shock to you, but actually, it hasn't been that long since women were enfranchised. Still, I would bet my bottom dollar that a woman produces something more useful than you ever do.

Quote :

Quote :

And if you look at exam results, girls outpoint boys.

In what exactly?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Quote :

Quote :

But I guess that is not men and women, because men and women are concepts that apply to sexually mature humans.

Here we go with sex as a cultural construct bullshit arguement.

No, you're straw-manning. I referred to the boys and girls (both gender-descriptive words) and to the men and women as being different concepts. Nothing to do with culture. Did you know that things mature sexually even if they are not a part of western culture? You again, show some deficiency in logical thinking...

Quote :

Quote :

What about an androgynous person? How do they fit on your scale?

I would like your description of what androgyny is.

Androgyny is like a hermaphrodite. As in, neither man nor woman, but both sexual organs are present... It's a tough one I know.

Poison IV wrote:

These are some of the worst arguments I've ever seen -_____-

On the one side we have Joker who needs to validate himself in the same way Purple Dragon does- because they have absolutely nothing else to show for their manhood.....

And on the other we have the defense of women and minorities etc as being less pronounced in the realms of science and industry because they have not been given enough opportunities -____-

They are both wrong.

To be able to fully understand why these events have taken place in history, you're gonna need to dig a hell of a lot deeper.

What do you mean by wrong? Do you mean morally wrong, or intellectually incorrect?

The statement that women haven't had as long to produce things of excellence like men have was made in response to the idea that men inherently are superior to women, at least mentally. Joker made the claim that men are more predominant in terms of valued production of ideas etc by way of saying that they do more. Of course saying that women haven't been in top positions as long is a valid argument against such a claim. It is not supposed to be the final word on the matter. Come on Poison IV, at least pretend to be following what is happening.

I can only assume you mean morally wrong, as I have shown clearly that the argument about women only being in positions where their achievements can be appreciated has been a relatively short period of time compared to men was made in a specific context and against a specific statement. It is not the only line of argument against the idea that men are mentally superior to women, it is a counter argument against the idea that the fact that men have produced more is evidence of their superiority.

Please, aid us in this discussion, say something that helps us understand whether women are actually inferior to men or not.

It could be that they were mentally inferior, in general, but that they are no longer. Or that they were not, but they are becoming so... Not everything is crystal clear and static.

d63tark wrote:

List of shoulders I have had to stand on:

Sylvia Plath, John Lee Hooker, Muddy Waters, Nicole Blackman, Lauri Anderson, Barbara Ennerich, Addriene Rich, Malcom X, Joyce Carol Oates, Ann Sexton, Beth Nugent, rosalie waldrop, langston Hughs, Billie Holiday, Patsy Cline, Tricky, the chick in KMFDM, the hot chick in White Zombie, Prince, Cornell West is kind of cool and really upbeat, Toni Holiday from Curve, shit, Sheryl Crow who in her second album was one of the best lyricists there was at the time, Ani DiFranco, and I'm quite certain I could go on and on with women and minorities who have blown me away in the same way that any white male can.

My god...you are a social princess.

Shoulders indeed.

MonoExplosion wrote:

Poison IV wrote:

These are some of the worst arguments I've ever seen -_____-

On the one side we have Joker who needs to validate himself in the same way Purple Dragon does- because they have absolutely nothing else to show for their manhood.....

And on the other we have the defense of women and minorities etc as being less pronounced in the realms of science and industry because they have not been given enough opportunities -____-

They are both wrong.

To be able to fully understand why these events have taken place in history, you're gonna need to dig a hell of a lot deeper.

What do you mean by wrong? Do you mean morally wrong, or intellectually incorrect?

The statement that women haven't had as long to produce things of excellence like men have was made in response to the idea that men inherently are superior to women, at least mentally. Joker made the claim that men are more predominant in terms of valued production of ideas etc by way of saying that they do more. Of course saying that women haven't been in top positions as long is a valid argument against such a claim. It is not supposed to be the final word on the matter. Come on Poison IV, at least pretend to be following what is happening.

I can only assume you mean morally wrong, as I have shown clearly that the argument about women only being in positions where their achievements can be appreciated has been a relatively short period of time compared to men was made in a specific context and against a specific statement. It is not the only line of argument against the idea that men are mentally superior to women, it is a counter argument against the idea that the fact that men have produced more is evidence of their superiority.

Please, aid us in this discussion, say something that helps us understand whether women are actually inferior to men or not.

It could be that they were mentally inferior, in general, but that they are no longer. Or that they were not, but they are becoming so... Not everything is crystal clear and static.

No, because mainly the whole thing is ridiculous. Everyone and their dipshit brother is coming at it from a fucked up angle.

No offense but I'm too far 'above it'.

In a way I couldn't possibly put into layman's terms.....

Oh I get it! So for you, it is not that everybody is their own person. But, it's also not that everybody is one of a type of person. It's somehow... more complex than that... Like, the angle has to be obtuse so as to get in the nook and cranny out the facts. I get it. Yeah, I'm like, way way up there.
That is way up there too... Or is it way down there? I mean depth wise... It's far away. That's what I know. You are far away.

There is more to it than a battle of gender and statistics and useful productions of the mind......yes, yes, and yes....

Stunted minds of little boys like the local Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumber go only as far as they are aware-----and their awareness doesn't amount to much.