Knight to Pawn Four. Check and Bullshit.
Wherever there is a league of sports, there is a separate and exclusive women’s league to weep in its shadow. That’s because a man playing against a woman in any sport is like Superman playing against a team of cacti wearing funny, oversized sunglasses.
It’s cute and hilarious.
Man has proven his physical prowess for millions of years — even when it was completely unnecessary to do so. Actually, in the end that turned out to be the proof. All you men know what I’m talking about there.
However, what if it wasn’t just our mighty strength that kept women hopelessly tethered to the Earth while we men soared above like gods in our awe-inspiring spectacles of sport? What if was also because women aren’t as smart as men? That is to say, because men are smarter than women.
Certainly that makes sense to us men, but unlike women, we would also like a side order of proof with our meal. Let’s think for a moment. If only women had their own league and championship for a sport that was entirely mental, like chess.
They do.
Woah, wait a minute. They do? Can someone please flag down the Obvious Express delivery truck? I think the delivery man forget a box of clues in the back addressed to women world-wide.
I thought this women’s chess championship might be some kind of publicity stunt — like last year when that one woman “played” golf in the men’s league and Nike milked their biggest cash cow to date: female empowerment. Completely masculine kudos to those brilliant men at Nike marketing by the way because that’s one ripe motherfucking cow.
I discovered, however, that it wasn’t a joke at all. Disappointingly, it also wasn’t a bunch of models playing chess in lingerie. That’s when I decided that any further research was a waste of my invaluable time.
Women’s leagues of anything are like midgets following men around dressed up exactly like them. They look the same, but come on. What are you serious here?
Related Articles:
January 16th, 2006 at 7:54 am - IP Man-Hash: cbc856ab3c6ed
I myself didn’t suggest that Emmy Noether created relativity, history suggested that she made a contribution to it, there’s a big difference. I’ve read about her and studied up on it. Unless the history books are lying (I wouldn’t see any reason why they would lie about it), in which case, they could be lying about a lot of men’s accomplishments as well.
January 16th, 2006 at 8:34 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
With respect, I think her contributions to relativity as Einstein initially formulated it were very modest indeed; far more so than you make them out to be. That said, I concur that her work, while not as seminal as you make it out to be, was strikingly elegant, beautiful even, and deserves recognition.
I certainly agree she deserves to be a significant figure in 20th century mathematics and physics.
The catch is this: for every Emmy Noether, there are 50 to 100 men of equal or greater skill and talent. This therefore tends to prove the thesis of this website. Where are the other 49 to 99 women?
Regards,
-wolfe.
January 16th, 2006 at 9:02 am - IP Man-Hash: cbc856ab3c6ed
Emmy Noether was a rarity in that she dared to defy the stereotypes placed on women in history (or herstory if you will). Women who wanted to be scientists, mathematicians, etc. were considered an oddity at best. Just because there were more men than women in those fields does not mean that more women couldn’t have been those things, the potential was there, it just means that most of them didn’t want to defy the stereotypes. And why do people belittle women’s accomplishments by saying that “there were more men of equal or greater skill and talent”? That is wrong. Is the woman who came up with the vaccination for small pox any less “talented” than the man who came up with penicillin by accident? Is the woman who invented Kevlar any less “talented” than the man who invented plastic? I think it depends on how you define “talent”, ability and “skills”.
January 16th, 2006 at 9:05 am - IP Man-Hash: cbc856ab3c6ed
Here’s a pleasant thought for the day:
Men who think that they can survive without women are like fish thinking that they can survive without water :-)
January 16th, 2006 at 9:18 am - IP Man-Hash: 3d56fcfd3a200
Wow. You stay away from this site for a few days, come back and its feminazi bullshit hour.
Their desperation for any kind of credit has me in stitches. So now it seems men were running around aimlessly while women were doing all the thinking. So all the while men were dumb, women were intelligent and somehow the dumbos convinced the intelligent ones that they were dumb and held them back from making any achievements. But on the other hand they did make achievments, but men took the credit for it even though they were dumb compared to the intelligent women.
Danger……danger…………screeching feminazi bullshit overload…
Its actually quite sad to see you women so desperate to dig up obscure names that nobody has ever heard of just to prove that your sex has been worthwhile for anything other than having babies and cooking….badly. If only nagging and bitching could be considered an achievement. You would all have had something to boast about then.
If they want to desperately cling to Marie Curie and Emmy whatsername, let em.
January 16th, 2006 at 9:27 am - IP Man-Hash: cbc856ab3c6ed
I’m hardly desperate for your approval, Geeza that is just wishful thinking on your part. And believe it or not, I am not even a feminist, don’t consider myself one. I am factual and honest. I believe in being fair to people of either gender. Most of you men on this website put women down horribly, why? What’s the point? I am just curious. Her name is Emmy Noether, thanks for your interest. I said that most women CHOSE not to achieve anything in those days, because men like you put them down and made them feel bad about themselves.
January 16th, 2006 at 9:35 am - IP Man-Hash: cbc856ab3c6ed
It’s a catch 22. Women are damned if they do, and damned if they don’t.
January 16th, 2006 at 9:36 am - IP Man-Hash: f84a3d1f68cf0
redtygrr said:
Here’s a pleasant thought for the day:
Men who think that they can survive without women are like fish thinking that they can survive without water :-)
-Spare me, what a ridiculous notion. Either sex can survive without each other, you make a mockery of human intelligence and your own in one statement. Does that mean that either sex is going to be happy about it? Somehow I doubt it….
January 16th, 2006 at 9:46 am - IP Man-Hash: f84a3d1f68cf0
redtygrr said:
I’m hardly desperate for your approval, Geeza that is just wishful thinking on your part. And believe it or not, I am not even a feminist, don’t consider myself one. I am factual and honest. I believe in being fair to people of either gender.
-Ok, ok sounds good, but from your previous posts I don’t believe it. To me you come off as a feminist with your rants and childish name calling.
Most of you men on this website put women down horribly, why? What’s the point? I am just curious. Her name is Emmy Noether, thanks for your interest. I said that most women CHOSE not to achieve anything in those days, because men like you put them down and made them feel bad about themselves.
-I will try to answer your question as clearly as I can, its my belief that there are several types of men at this message board. Some of them are bitter and angry (and rightfully so) over being mistreated by the wonderful world of divorce courts and family courts ergo: child support, alimony, separation from children, misandrist views on fatherhood and marriage. Others find this board amusing or funny or as a place to talk with fellow men about subjects that they like. Still others see what is happening to our society due to (what i believe is )an OVER-feminization and are looking for someplace to state their views. Then there are a few that genuinely hate women, for whatever they have done, and respond in kind on here. There are more than that however that is all I have seen.
January 16th, 2006 at 10:10 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
Geeza wrote:
Amen. I did the same, Geeza, and it seems Dick’s been beset upon all sides, though he, Christian and others have defended the cause valiantly.
No, she was a rarity because she was highly intelligent. If you actually look at the history of that time period, huge numbers of women were laying claim to the citadel of education.
No, I won’t.
No, no, no. You assume the argument.
Let’s turn it around. If what you are saying is true, where are all those women? Why have women taken over the legal profession, made significant inroads into medical care, and yet made no significantly greater impact (vs 100 years ago) in physics, engineering, and mathematics?
Could it be that there actually are genuine differences between men’s and women’s brains — apart from the obvious body differences of height, muscular strength, ability to bear children, etc?
The truth points to itself. The light shines in front of you, and yet you appear to refuse to see. It is your choice.
Don’t be silly. I don’t belittle the achievements of those individual women one whit.
I admire Noether’s thinking. I found it spectacularly elegant when I was younger. (The other women who invented play-doh, plastics, kevlar, the teletubbies, or whatever you cite; I’m not familiar with them).
The question remains. With no denigration of the lovely elegance of Noether’s thinking, there are roughly 50-100 men of comparable thought in her field, in her time. So where are the other 49-99 women? You claim they didn’t want to defy the stereotypes. Fine. Where are they now?
We have no real barriers to women in virtually every imaginable field today. (Civil Engineering, the military, and politics are probably the worst remaining for barriers). None of those 3 fields are a great opportunity for a highly intelligent woman with the possible exception of the first. Be that as it may, where are the other 49-99?
Indeed. And you seem to define it as a cry of gender righteousness, yet unwilling to defend the logical consequences of doing so.
-wolfe
January 16th, 2006 at 10:12 am - IP Man-Hash: cbc856ab3c6ed
Believe or not, I am NOT a feminist, I DO believe in fair treament to both genders, I just believe in giving credit where credit is due. Some men are rightfully angry and bitter about the divorce court systems, child custody, alimony, etc. I can’t say that I blame them for that. I don’t agree with affirmative actions, or feminazis points of view, but I don’t think it’s fair to lump all of us women together as “dumb bitches, whores etc”. There are bad women and bad women in the world and there are good men and good women in the world, we are all individuals. I think alot of us on this site (me and the men included) have resorted to childish name calling.
January 16th, 2006 at 10:15 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
I agree wholeheartedly with everything you’ve said in that paragraph above. I don’t believe I’ve ever resorted to childish name-calling; if I have, you’re welcome to call me on it.
And Emmy Noether rocked..
-wolfe.
January 16th, 2006 at 10:16 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
That said, I honestly and sincerely believe the site has a legitimate premise.
Best,
-wolfe
January 16th, 2006 at 10:16 am - IP Man-Hash: cbc856ab3c6ed
Wolf, I disagree with you. Girls are, even nowadays, just not encouraged the same as boys when it comes to intellectual persuits. It’s a vicious circle. Girls are told that they are not suited for math and science, if you tell someone something enough, they start to believe it. There have been a few rare women (Noether, Curie) who have dared to break through the gender barriers. Most women don’t have alot of self confidence, myself included. I was not enouraged in any intellectual pursuits.
January 16th, 2006 at 10:17 am - IP Man-Hash: cbc856ab3c6ed
Not all the men have resorted to childish namecalling, Wolf, just alot of them have.
January 16th, 2006 at 11:21 am - IP Man-Hash: f3ae1ac46a2e3
That is completely, and 100%, not true.
When men post claims like that, they are accompanied with a little thing called evidence.
-Dick
January 16th, 2006 at 12:21 pm - IP Man-Hash: 367aa6a77dd36
Redtygrr, you’re speaking absolute nonsense.
If anything, girls are far more encouraged to pursue the maths and sciences than boys are — because they have far more attention paid to them in the education system, and they are rewarded far more than boys are.
I cannot recall any teacher ever having told me, or any other girl, that I couldn’t or shouldn’t go for math — indeed, it was my own laziness that made me choose less demanding subjects at the time.
Besides, can you imagine the huge ruckus that would result from such blatant gender discrimination? What teacher(s) in their right mind would risk such a thing?
I suspect that many other women have made similar choices — it’s certainly not fair to blame our own individual laziness on a so-called “patriarchal system” just to avoid facing up to our poor decison-making in regards to education and careers.
January 16th, 2006 at 12:33 pm - IP Man-Hash: 97beff8a702a9
As if many of the male scientists and philosophers hadn’t been repressed, threatened, censored, tortured and even executed. Why is it that men can overcome the barriers and women can’t? Why couldn’t wimmin use their alleged social superiorities to transform cultures? And how on earth can we ever satisfy you? Today, parents care as much about the education of their daughters as that of their sons. They would be at least as proud of their daughters’ achievements as their sons’. The education system has been modified numerous times in order to ensure that there are no more gender barriers. In fact, it has been turned against boys. More women than men have been attending college for quite a while now. We’re being constantly reminded that men and women are definitely equal and that women are superior in linguistic and social skills while men are pigs that think about sex all the time. The stereotype that all men are sex obsessed should keep men from intellectual pursuits, right? If you tell someone that all he thinks about is sex, he eventually thinks only about sex, doesn’t he? If you tell him that he is a pig for long enough, he turns into one, doesn’t he? On the other hand, calling women sluts can’t keep them from dressing as they wish or choosing to be sexually free. Quite amazingly, though, patriarchy has been incredibly successful in preventing wimmin from being great scientists, philosophers and inventors, except in a few cases.
If, in spite of all the opportunities and the hand-outs, women still can’t break the gender barriers, then it follows that there are no gender barriers apart from the genetic ones inherent in women.
January 16th, 2006 at 1:16 pm - IP Man-Hash: 3d56fcfd3a200
When did I say you were desperate for my approval?? Must be wishful thinking on your part.
That is what I have issue with most of all. That women like you hark about not being a feminist, yet you dig a little deeper and you find out that they have happily been swallowing the spoon fed feminist propaganda with joy. In your case, no digging was needed at all:
Surprise surprise. A typical feminist male-bashing statement. Whatever the problem, blame the men.
Achievement of any note takes effort and is often faced with obstacles. Men have faced redicule, persecution and even death in persuit of achievement. Its the ability to stand fast in the face of obstacles that is sometimes more worthy of praise than the achievement itself. So if women CHOSE not to achieve anything because they were made to feel bad, whos fault is that?
You asked, so here it is. My point of view anyway.
I’ve never been divorced, never been dumped. I’ve been in a happy marriage that has lasted for nearly 25 years. So I do not really have any axe to grind against anyone in particular.
For most of my life I’ve treated women with more care and respect than I ever would a man. I honestly think that it is natural for men to behave that way. That doesnt mean that ALL men will behave that way.
I think that the roles that men and women played in the past were purely dictated by nature. Women were physically equiped to give birth and therefore ended up looking after the young. Men were physically stronger, and therefore ended up doing the providing and protecting.
It is as simple as that. No conspiracies, no worldwide plan to enslave women.
I think that even now, men instinctively want to protect and provide for the women in their lives. Women dont need protecting anymore as the world is much safer now than it used to be, and women can provide for themselves. OK. No big deal.
My problem with alot of women and I include so called non-feminists in this is that apparently somehow ‘men’ are ‘responsible’ for oppressing women and that somehow includes me too. Men are rapists, men are murderers, men are war-mongerers.
I’d like to know where this woman is that I am supposed to have oppresed and raped, who did I murder and what war did I start?
Apparently I am lazy, irresponsible and immature, as well as dumb, selfish and inconsiderate.
Now if some lunatic lesbo feminazi is saying these things, you could understand why she would be saying something stupid like that. The biggest wind up for me is that women who are so-called non feminists are just as eager to trash men, whether it is with some stupid greeting card, an article in the newspaper or the typical ‘men’ comment implying that there is something inherently wrong with being a man.
Even my wife used to come up with the typical ‘uh, you men’ if I burnt the toast or something just as menial and I’d tell her that she couldnt blame the entire male sex because I had burnt the toast. It was my fault.
If women were confined to homemaking in the past, it wasnt a worldwide conspiracy, its just they way things were. You cannot blame men and women for doing what was natural to them. Let alone blame men now for what men did in the past.
Apparently I am supposed to tolerate the male-bashing because women in the past have suffered at the hands of oppressive men. What the f**k?
It would be as rediculous as a black man calling an ordinary decent white guy a racist bogotted slave driver. A white American man today has nothing to do with a slave owner of the past.
Yet women do it all the time. They prime themselves up for a conflict with men, that men are not even fighting.
And if they call the epidemic of divorces, split-ups and single parent families a victory, then maybe its time that the men actually did some fighting.
January 16th, 2006 at 1:44 pm - IP Man-Hash: f3ae1ac46a2e3
50 Man Points for that, Geeza.
-Dick