I read posts here that call different things, "harmful to humanity."  Others call something, "good" or "bad" or "evil."

A very simple question, who gets to decide the definition of  "harmful to humanity" and what is there critieria? The same for "good," "bad," and "evil?" These are not material terms. If everything is material isn't there just "is" and not these moral declarations if one is being thoroughly atheist?

Help me understand your position so I am fair and honest about the views. Thanks.

Views: 9123

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Well remember, it's not really fun as long as you have a safe-word ;]

Suzy I am none of the above. I don't try to prove myself, I play sports but only for exercise purposes. Not into flashy cars, don't care about the size of another mans penis and I'm scared of heights so no bridges for me.

You, dear Tom, are just another bloke who is sure of himself, and doesn't have to prove his manhood.  My man is the same, has never been to a football game, as long as a car goes from A to B, not jumping etc. I am talking about the average run of the mill male.

In the scheme of things, man wins for violence, rape, torture.

There are just not enough of men like you.

Well, let's face reality: dominance is based on the potential for violence. This is why malekind has dominated the scene, and probably will for the foreseeable future.

In some ways, we are hard-wired to defer to signs of strong masculinity. Studies have shown that we tend to defer to the taller, the more massive, the deeper voiced among us. Those tend to be men, or women who can simulate men to various degrees.

@Unseen In most ways we are hard-wired to defer to signs of strong masculinity.

Absolutely. Women do not like short men, or men with squeaky voices. It is all about getting the best genes, which is still a primitive instinct.  But if a man has money - it means he is able to 'look after' her - and it doesn't matter what his head or body looks like. He is still considered to be 'better' than the average, which is why old men marry young women. That's just the way it goes.

Australian female newsreaders invariably have deeper voices than the average female.

As a photographer of women, I have worked with many women who mention they have a job interview coming up. Often their first real interview. I tell them the same thing I told my daughter when she started looking for work.

"When you meet someone in a business context, shake hands, and make that handshake nice and firm. Don't act like a child. When you feel like giggling either don't do it or laugh instead of giggling. Acting all giggly girl won't get you far.

"Speak in a low register, not in a high squeaky voice. Avoid excitability. Show that you're in control of yourself.

Dress sexy but in good business taste. This may give you an advantage over the males you are competing with and believe me they will use any advantages they have, such as talking about sports."

Suzanne, Take Two:

"Why don't women want to keep little boys as sex slaves?"

While many men might like (in fantasy more than in reality) to live as sex slaves, many more men have lived as provider slaves, or provider objects.

That women are now majorities in professional schools (i.e., law and medicine) supports a conclusion that men have been able to tyrannize because they have historically had greater access to wealth.

"Women don't have to fight 'free will' not to do any of this - Why?"

I hope I'm stating this clearly: do women have greater "social permission" than men to rely on self-interest as motivation?

Free will seems more a rationalization than a fact. I doubt left brain/right brain explanations.

That is the point Tom, men fantasize about being sex slaves, but I also know in reality they just couldn't keep up :D 

So, why do men fantasize about being a sex slave, when women don't?

America is the biggest producer of porn. Who do you think is the majority that watches it - men or women?

There are always aberrations to any statement. Ha,ha, I knew that as soon as I made my comment, blokes would come on out, and start naming all the shitty, violent, controlling women. One can tell when a man in not an adequate male.

I am talking about the average female, who had to fight, all over the world, just to get the vote why? And even then, the vote was conditional.


In my lifetime, and I am not that old :D after the second world war, if a woman married, she was not allowed, legally, to work. In my lifetime, if a woman had children and worked, she would get death threats, and told to stay home and look after her children. Women went to jail, were forced fed, tubes down their throat - just for the right to vote. Why?

That women are now majorities in professional schools (i.e., law and medicine) supports a conclusion that men have been able to tyrannize because they have historically had greater access to wealth.

Yep - and had to fight for it all the way - keep anyone down, and they will, eventually, fight back. Women just keep behind the eight ball, and if women didn't fight for basic human rights, they just would never had got them, and in America, it was a state by state fight. The same as African Americans, natives of any country, Gays - all have to fight, just for equal rights.

I have huge respect for men, but only some - the ones who are sure of themselves, and are not threatened by women. There are good men, bad men, there are good women, bad women, and I feel sorry for a male who gets tied up with a nagging cow. BUT, women will never, per se, plummet the depths that men can and do.  I have huge respect for men who have gone to war, who do all the shitty jobs that women, physically can't do, I have great respect for the men who truly love their children, and look after them. This forward thinking of the male, to 'allow' women to reach their full potential, I think, is tied to intelligence. 

Keep in mind, I generalize, because I also know bitchy manipulating shitty women -  and I am ashamed, embarrassed when I hear of a bloke being taken down by a woman, and through history, the women who are vengeful murdering terrorists, but I think the average female wants to help society, which is why they outnumber male nurses etc. - but when women are encouraged, the same as a male, educated the same as a male, expected to do as well as a male, she will achieve, the same as men do. Doctors, Law. Research Science etc. etc.

But it is when one goes back  in history, and women heroes, achievers, inventors, scientists are just not named and revered the same as men. It is changing, but it has been slow, and a women in a prominent, powerful position, had better have a thicker skin, and be attacked for extraordinary things, Like 'She has a big bum, and long earlobes (I kid you not, this is the sort of stupidity from her male opposition sprouted to our Female Atheist Prime Minister).

Men have the brawn, aggressiveness and the power - they are innately competitive, one can see it on this site, and women need men onside, 'cause, and make no mistake, men make the rules, and it is only when men come onside, that women will be really able to achieve their full potential. It is just one reason why more and more women are not getting married or having children, and power to them. 

Quote by a bloke: A woman is just an aid to masturbation - now, that just warms a woman's heart.

Free will seems more a rationalization than a fact. I doubt left brain/right brain explanations. I think this is true.

Men and women need each other, and until they are on the same side - there will always be problems, because women in western countries, at least, just won't put up with being 'controlled'. It is a totally different matter in Muslim and third world countries.

But sex slaves is a serious question and problem - in third world countries, people sell their daughters off, simply because they can.

This is just one article about it :(


"why men do horrendous misery causing acts, but not women?"

Cleopatra, Imelda Marcos, Isabel Perón, Margaret Thatcher. Last one had 323 men killed on her direct orders. When it comes to the application of violence for a cause, women can do an equal amount of damage as men (perhaps even more?). Men have had the most power to fuck shit up for thousands of years, now women are finally getting their chance to do the same. 

You forgot Golda Meir and Queen Victoria.

Let's not forget Wu Zetian, Jiang Qing, Bloody Mary, or Catherine the Great either.

There are plenty of terrible everyday women, too, whose names we don't know.


© 2022   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service