Are women superior to men?

Changes from Version 13 to Version 14

On the point: how to measure superiority?

How can a human exist without birth?
even cloning and in-vitro fertilization require the use of a womb.

"They might both be rendered obsolete eventually"-not really there's no sign of the x-chromosome depleting; just the y.

And yes, equality in abilities in/for everything less one and superiority in the remaining 'one', does logically reflect 'overall' superiority.

You type 'Might be' &'eventually'. P.O.I
The topic, by definition, refers to the 'present', the question begins with 'Are', not 'will be' or 'might be'.

Just saying 'it does not exist' is not a substantiation but merely a statement. Yes so men took over, were bossy , women 'fought'(yes, men didn't say 'hey,come come, you can play with us' women struggled/fought) for their rights and continue to do so, showing up stronger than men in all 'man-made' fields/constructs.

In fact, the first programmer was a woman and as usual men hijacked that field and continually try to take credit for 'the women behind' them.

Blocking women from their own turf using unfair means: such as for example:'veclock' deletion.

Superiority is too vague a term to measure. How do we judge superiority? On what grounds, and who exactly says? The only ultimate measure of superiority would be if women were better in every other aspect than men, which is eminently false. So women are more necessary to reproduce - so what? There is more to human existence than reproducing. They might both be rendered obsolete eventually.

The fact that the artificial sperm was developed before the artificial womb is not sufficient to deem the female sex superior.

*Superiority does not exist in terms of males vs. females.
From the beginning, men have taken power and put women in the subordinate position. While these days women are proving more and more their equality to men in aspects that they were once considered inferior, that doesn't mean that they are superior. People that take excessive pride in being better than those of the other sex (like a dominatrix or an alpha-male etc..) tend to be hardened to the world emotionally, and are therefore flawed and, in conclusion, not superior.

See above for the earlier comments on the first programmer.

Yes, because...

 

No, because... how to measure superiority?

How can a human exist without birth? even cloning and in-vitro fertilization require the use of a womb.

"They might both be rendered obsolete eventually"-not really there's no sign of the x-chromosome depleting; just the y.

And yes, equality in abilities in/for everything less one and superiority in the remaining 'one', does logically reflect 'overall' superiority.

You type 'Might be' &'eventually'. P.O.I The topic, by definition, refers to the 'present', the question begins with 'Are', not 'will be' or 'might be'.

Just saying 'it does not exist' is not a substantiation but merely a statement. Yes so men took over, were bossy , women 'fought'(yes, men didn't say 'hey,come come, you can play with us' women struggled/fought) for their rights and continue to do so, showing up stronger than men in all 'man-made' fields/constructs.

In fact, the first programmer was a woman and as usual men hijacked that field and continually try to take credit for 'the women behind' them.

Blocking women from their own turf using unfair means: such as for example:'veclock' deletion.

 

Superiority is too vague a term to measure. How do we judge superiority? On what grounds, and who exactly says? The only ultimate measure of superiority would be if women were better in every other aspect than men, which is eminently false. So women are more necessary to reproduce - so what? There is more to human existence than reproducing. They might both be rendered obsolete eventually.

The fact that the artificial sperm was developed before the artificial womb is not sufficient to deem the female sex superior.

*Superiority does not exist in terms of males vs. females. From the beginning, men have taken power and put women in the subordinate position. While these days women are proving more and more their equality to men in aspects that they were once considered inferior, that doesn't mean that they are superior. People that take excessive pride in being better than those of the other sex (like a dominatrix or an alpha-male etc..) tend to be hardened to the world emotionally, and are therefore flawed and, in conclusion, not superior.

See above for the earlier comments on the first programmer.

 
22 February 2011