Have Men Oppressed Women?

NotaPAWG

Banned
Joined
Jun 20, 2013
Messages
22,774
Reputation
6,490
Daps
79,970
Really? The calendar? That's what you chose to nitpick about? Talk about obfuscation, lol.
How about fukking architecture, agriculture, harnessing exectricity, the internal combustion engine etc. Human and civil rights? Medicine?


Yes, it could have. But it would be wrong. Black people's contributions are well documented. Just like it's well documented that men are the major contributors in basically every field that you can think of.


Begging your pardons, but how is that a rebuttal? You've just proved my point. Those fields are traditionally run by men because men show the most competence in them.
Do you really think that if a woman invented the lightbulb her contribution would have been ignored
?

I'm not nitpicking, i was just using one example. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/jan/23/gender.uk here's an article, with a few other things. suspension bridges being one of them.

Her contribution wouldn't have been ignored, it just wouldn't have been credited for, a male would have been awarded the credit
 
Last edited:

Brofato

Fade Doe
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
5,058
Reputation
390
Daps
9,042
Very well, show me some.

And just so we're clear, it's not enough to show me that some women were ahead of men in a particular field. That's not what we're arguing about. Show me proof that women's contributions rivaled those of men in both number and scope, but were instead ignored or discredited.

The thing you're not getting is that the number and scope would be curbed due to those women being treated as less than. But xkcd did a good job of tossing out a few examples. Who knows how many others will forever go without record of being attributed to women or minorities. Breakthroughs just as big as the light bulb, mind you.

marie_curie.png
 

Mr. Pink

All Star
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
3,050
Reputation
-430
Daps
5,941
margaret-thatcher-redo.jpg


She's a terrific example of a female who was able to handle responsibility.
I think the problem is that a lot of people think like you, and in turn, we aren't given the opportunity.
Again, you're not understanding me. For the last time: I don't claim that women aren't capable of competence. That would be pure stupidity.

And yes, Maggie Thatcher was very competent. She had her faults(just like anyone else) but she undertook great steps into making Britain great again. You know who was more competent? Churchill.
 

Remote

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Aug 29, 2013
Messages
78,936
Reputation
23,796
Daps
358,605
margaret-thatcher-redo.jpg


She's a terrific example of a female who was able to handle responsibility.
I think the problem is that a lot of people think like you, and in turn, we aren't given the opportunity.

This makes me uncomfortable.
Because yes, Margaret Thatcher was a powerful and effective woman and leader.




....but my goodness, do I disagree with her political views and actions....and I think she was an evil wench...
But yes, she got things done.

:wow:
 

Desirous

Action expresses priorities
Joined
Aug 27, 2013
Messages
9,560
Reputation
2,425
Daps
14,053
Reppin
Toronto

Remote

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Aug 29, 2013
Messages
78,936
Reputation
23,796
Daps
358,605
I'm sorry.
I shouldn't distract from the discussion based on my opinion on ONE woman.
 

Greenstrings

All Star
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
1,829
Reputation
470
Daps
3,660
Again, you're not understanding me. For the last time: I don't claim that women aren't capable of competence. That would be pure stupidity.

And yes, Maggie Thatcher was very competent. She had her faults(just like anyone else) but she undertook great steps into making Britain great again. You know who was more competent? Churchill.
:pachaha: only the most blinkered historian would argue that Churchill was more competent than Thatcher. He was a good wartime prime minister because he was charismatic and belligerent but he also happened to be a lecherous alcoholic and was responsible for many blunders.

There are of course better examples but just thought I'd point that out.
 

Mr. Pink

All Star
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
3,050
Reputation
-430
Daps
5,941
The thing you're not getting is that the number and scope would be curbed due to those women being treated as less than. But xkcd did a good job of tossing out a few examples. Who knows how many others will forever go without record of being attributed to women or minorities. Breakthroughs just as big as the light bulb, mind you.
Excuse me, but it's very simple: Those women were ignored/snubbed by the scientific community? Why? Because the scientific community was run by men. Why was the scientific community run by men? Because men's contribution to the scientific community was greater, both in number and in scope.

Look, I don't deny that women's contributions going ignored is fukked up. But look at it this way: why aren't the roles reversed? Why were men in the position to reject women's contributions and not the other way around? Do you see where I'm going with this?
 

Brofato

Fade Doe
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
5,058
Reputation
390
Daps
9,042
Excuse me, but it's very simple: Those women were ignored/snubbed by the scientific community? Why? Because the scientific community was run by men. Why was the scientific community run by men? Because men's contribution to the scientific community was greater, both in number and in scope.

Look, I don't deny that women's contributions going ignored is fukked up. But look at it this way: why aren't the roles reversed? Why were men in the position to reject women's contributions and not the other way around? Do you see where I'm going with this?

Not really because @ebonykiss just pretty much summed up what you're missing, breh.
 

Kilgore Trout

Banned
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
29,659
Reputation
-7,722
Daps
77,512
Reppin
Alabama
Look, I don't deny that women's contributions going ignored is fukked up. But look at it this way: why aren't the roles reversed? Why were men in the position to reject women's contributions and not the other way around? Do you see where I'm going with this?


Are you serious with this?

Men have been able to control women since the beginning of time, Only now is it starting to get equal and I'm sure we will start seeing more contributions.
 

Remote

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Aug 29, 2013
Messages
78,936
Reputation
23,796
Daps
358,605
"who discovered RADIOACTIVITY" !!!!

By the way, since we're on the internet, I'd like to remind people of Hedy LaMarr, who was a friggin genius.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedy_Lamarr

During World War II, Antheil and Lamarr discussed the fact that radio-controlled torpedoes, while important in the naval war, could easily be jammed by broadcasting interference at the frequency of the control signal, causing the torpedo to go off course.[citation needed] Lamarr had learned something about torpedoes from Mandl. Antheil and Lamarr developed the idea of using frequency hopping to avoid jamming: using a piano roll to randomly change the signal sent between a control center and the torpedo at short bursts within a range of 88 frequencies in the radio-frequency spectrum (there are 88 black and white keys on a piano keyboard). The specific code for the sequence of frequencies would be held identically by the controlling ship and in the torpedo. This basically encrypted the signal. It was impossible for the enemy to scan and jam all 88 frequencies, as this would require too much power or complexity. The frequency-hopping sequence was controlled by a player-piano mechanism, which Antheill had earlier used to score his Ballet Mecanique.[citation needed]

On August 11, 1942, U.S. Patent 2,292,387 was granted to Antheil and "Hedy Kiesler Markey", Lamarr's married name at the time. This early version of frequency hopping, although novel, soon met with opposition from the U.S. Navy and was not adopted.[12]The idea was not implemented in the USA until 1962, when it was used by U.S. military ships during a blockade of Cuba after the patent had expired. This work was honored in 1997, when the Electronic Frontier Foundation gave Lamarr a belated award for her contributions.[4] In 1998, an Ottawa wireless technology developer, Wi-LAN Inc., acquired a 49% claim to the patent from Lamarr for an undisclosed amount of stock (Eliza Schmidkunz, Inside GNSS).[13]

Lamarr's and Antheil's frequency-hopping idea serves as a basis for modern spread-spectrum communication technology, such as Bluetooth, COFDM (used in Wi-Fi network connections), and CDMA (used in some cordless and wireless telephones).[14] Blackwell, Martin, and Vernam's 1920 patent Secrecy Communication System (1598673) seems to lay the communications groundwork for Kiesler and Antheil's patent, which employed the techniques in the autonomous control of torpedoes.
 
Top