One in Three Women is Illiterate
Sometimes the statement men are better than women leaves me wanting a little more in the flavor of substance. It’s not often. Like all men, the shortcomings of women are something I’ve learned to accept and move on. However, occasionally we men need to re-evaluate. We need more than rational hypothesizing and logical conjecture. We need facts for the why’s and how’s.
I pose this as a formal theory. Men are better than women at everything because something like 30% of women are illiterate.
Sounds shocking doesn’t it? But really, when do women need to read? Numbers don’t count as reading, so illiteracy does not impede women from writing checks or measuring all the progress they’re not making while they’re not working out at the gym.
Before I get too ahead of myself let me quote some statistics. UNICEF and UNESCO say that two out of every three illiterates is a woman. They give the world-wide feminine literacy rate in the sixtieth percentile, while the male literacy rate towers above that number at nearly 90%. I think you’ll agree that that’s plenty of numerical majesty to spare.
Initially, when I saw the figures I thought to myself, maybe that’s why women are so shitty at everything. Just like the kid who is really shitty at baseball and then it turns out he just needed some glasses. Maybe women just need to learn how to read.
Then I realized the writing on the walls of every cluster fuck women are about to step into is only metaphorical writing. They also don’t need to be able to read to shut the hell up every once in a while and listen when something other than Oprah or an appliance that resembles Oprah is dispensing sound life advice.
Perhaps instead of Easy Bake Ovens and Barbie Dolls this Christmas, mothers should be buying their daughters Hooked on Phonics.
Related Articles:
Pages: « 34 … 33 32 31 30 29 [28] 27 26 25 24 23 … 1 » Show All
No. I never said you were tacky, I just think your idea (in this area) is tacky. If you take cubic zirconia as a diamond substitute you will find:-
a. it is a mineral not a plastic
b. on the Mohs hardness scale a Diamond is rated a 10 whereas a cubic zirconia is measured at 8.5 to 9.0 (so your argument about it not lasting the test of time is questionable since although cubic zirconia isn’t as hard as a diamond, it is still quite high on the hardness scale, it could very well stand the test of time.)
c. it a fraction of the price of a real diamond
Not only does a cubic zirconia look the part, but if the hardness scale is anyting to go by, it could stand the test of time, and is quite close to diamond quality.
So I will reiterate: if having a “real” diamond is important to you, fine. I personally think that viewpoint is tacky because the only significant difference between diamonds and substitutes such as cubic zirconia is the price.
Gee it appears that you came to this site unwelcomed for the sole purpose of quibbling with everyone, since you are not welcome here and no one ever agrees with you it surely seeems you like to quibble.
You do seem to be providing me with a great demonstration of what I should not be doing, so thanks :)
Then don’t quibble, Female.
I don’t wish to quibble with you or anyone, I am entitled to my beliefs and you are entitled to yours, but I would have thought that I was also entitled to not be called tacky by you for my beliefs. I guess I was wrong there.
What an interesting idea.
I’m not interested in arguing with you about this, Female. If having a real diamond ring is important to you, that’s your choice. Quibbling over whether or not it should be important to others, is a waste of time. You are not going to change minds here.
btw abaddon, your chart is done, go to wolfe’s silly stuff forum.
a woman does not wait to be unmodded.
Here is my question to Luka, it seems that you are implying my beliefs are tacky, ergo, I am tacky. You say that you are only concerned about whether the ring stands the test of time or not, and yet my exact issue with plastic is that it won’t. Diamonds are stronger and symbolic, hence better. This isn’t about cost, if anyone bothered to read my comments correctly, it’s about meaning and practicality.
Well according to Dick’s definition of whore, I actually am not, sweetcheeks.
Everything I have, I worked for and I paid for. I have never received any money from any man and when it was offered, I declined. Sexuality has had nothing to do with what I have achieved, for every job I have accepted, I have been interviewed by a woman, and thems the facts. Funnily enough, where I have been interviewed by a man and subsequently offered a job by a male, I have declined those jobs. Why? Because I felt like they wanted to hire me based on something other than my ability to do the work. Of course, you guys are educating me fairly well that my morality and standards are out of date with current social norms and that it would really be in my own interests to become a parasitic whore. Good job fellas.
Honestly I don’t think my question was really awnswered however oh well. Here’s one that will never fly with women, how about having your ring tatooed on?
-Strength and Honor-
Well according to Dick’s definition of whore, I actually am not, sweetcheeks.
Everything I have, I worked for and I paid for. I have never received any money from any man and when it was offered, I declined. Sexuality has had nothing to do with what I have achieved, for every job I have accepted, I have been interviewed by a woman, and thems the facts. Funnily enough, where I have been interviewed by a man and subsequently offered a job by a male, I have declined those jobs. Why? Because I felt like they wanted to hire me based on something other than my ability to do the work. Of course, you guys are educating me fairly well that my morality and standards are out of date with current social norms and that it would really be in my own interests to become a parasitic whore. Good job fellas.
You are a stupid bitch.
So you’re not a materialist because you won’t physically die for designer clothes and jewelry? Yes, you are. Women won’t die for anything, but they will abandone “love” for riches. You’re a whore like all the rest. I guess the Western Elites aren’t materialists because they won’t die for cheap oil but they send their country’s poor minorities and rednecks to do it?
And finally we get back to the topic of “literacy” and your lack of it. I don’t have a fake diamond or a real one any longer, nor will I ever again procure one to marry a harlot in the West’s system of slash and burn female+sadist political/judge alliance.
Rapists are smarter than married men.
Some man may have created the ring traditions but man didn’t create the marraige. That was Gods idea. Though many men are finding that women aren’t worth being married too.
You’re liar and a materialistic bitch, now bug off.
Yeah… I dont know how we got from women being illiterate to how much diamonds cost… or something.
Back to the topic gentlemen?
This topic is bullshit.
So, are you calling me tacky then? You say that you are only concerned about whether it stands the test of time or not, and yet my exact issue with plastic is that it won’t.
Personally I find it tacky to be so concerned with “real” diamonds anyway… the only thing I would be concerned about is, as abaddon said, the symbolism behind the gift, that and whether or not the ring can stand the test of time.
No you dubbo, you SHOULD NOT MENTION HOW MUCH YOU PAID FOR IT, that is incredibly uncouth and tacky. One can easily tell by one’s eye whether something is quality and expensive or not…how many times do I need to repeat myself about this?? Well I suppose I could repeat it as many times as I like because I am FREEEEEEE.
Well it depends on your job and salary, doesn’t it? You can work 80 hours a week and still be on a crap wage.
“afford” means afford.
In my opinion, you probably shouldn’t spend less than $500 on an engagement ring and spending more than $1500 - $2000 seems excessive. Just remember, it must be a diamond.
OMG I’m FREE!!!!