[Little]

I would urge you not to leave these forums on my account, but that doesn't rescind my opinion. I absolutely disagree with being "unenlightened," since it implies that I am being ignorant, prejudiced, or uninformed. In asserting that people are individuals I am most decidedly unprejudiced, so maybe you are implying that I am, to use a similar word, uneducated. Maybe you could consider me that. I'm young and I'm not a psychology, sociology, or anthropology student, but I'm still perfectly capable of having an opinion and expressing it to you without having to be threatened of having ruined your forum experience.
You are right that men are programmed to hunt and provide while women are programmed to nurture; well, in a sense. We are physically programmed to do so, but that doesn't mean we are emotionally programmed, which is the realm to which you allude. Many of the attributes you say describe women so well are better applied to men; a lack of emotional strength and perceptiveness are the main reasons why women aren't allowed in the infantry (foot soldiers, in case anyone isn't familiar with the lingo) and they are much better reasons than the physical ones.
Intellectual intelligence is historically more applied to men, though that is more likely a cultural issue.
You really must admit that this post is silly. You speak as though women secretly think that they are superior; I get this image of women "babysitting" all the men in the world while snickering behind their backs. You're "surprised" we don't feel that way ourselves and you even blame a cultural oppression for our lack of hubris! Relationships where one person is "superior" to the other is on the bad side of a scale moving towards abuse.
It's a whimsical line of thought; I'd even call it flippant. I'd surely enjoy being a part of the superior gender, even if I was in the rough, violent, insensitive bottom 10th of it, but it's lonely at the top and it's bad enough to be human at the top of the food chain and I'd prefer to give all credit where it is due: to everybody.

[anonymouswhitefemale]

You seem to be trying to convince yourself as much as everyone else loris...

You are playing with esoteric and impossible to quantify characteristics, and whilst I'm an essentialist (women and men are equal, philosophically, but that there are psysical and mental differences), I see little to your argument.

I also disagree on the weight you give to characteristivs.

For example, I don't think that strength and coordination are an equal trade of for listening skills and emotional intelligence.

As far as problem solving goes, why isn't the best chess player female?

The less physical the claim you are making, the more subjective to character you are. Men are not always emotionally unstable babbling wrecks, and women often have trouble holding it together.


Let me ask you this: What good is slightly more attuned emotional awareness when you're trapping animals to FEED your family. I think food is more important than feeling loved ...

[AngelicBunny]

Well, for men, after strength comes coordination. They also have less hang ups about things, and can get things done. Their emotional arrogance/ignorance also makes them better at coping with life... They can spend their time fixing things instead of worrying about them, in practical and social scenes.

That's not to say that men are better in general, though.

Haha if only my boyfriend didn't worry about things... gets them done though, but he gets stressed from all his worrying... and it's scary

I think women and men are equal, they just have different qualities. All to do with the balance right? Ying and yang - they both need each other... that kinda idea, know what I mean?

That's how I see it anyway.