Quote:
Quote:
Obviously this is very hard to qualify objectively, but it is very fashionable these days to treated men and women as absolute equals even though it is not the case. Soldiers for example are very rarely female, and with good reason. |
Quote:
Sounds more like your opinion to me. It would be just as accurate if i were to claim that men are just more naturally predisposed to the kind of objectivity and dispassion necessary in the business world. Even if women were more capable child rearers(which you admit there is little actual evidence of), that doesn't mean that all men, or even most men, are incapable of raising children effectively. Quote:
It is very fashionable to treat men and women as equals, because for the most part, they are. |
Quote:
You would have to define what sort of traits are required to be successful in the business world. On the one hand empathy and higher social capabilities might help a women be successful. Objectivity and dispassion might help make a man successful. Objectivity and dispassion are less likely to make you a better parent than a woman however, your child is not a company car. I introduced the armed forces bit because a friend of mine covered this in his thesis. The fact is that on average women exert 80% more energy than men to achieve the same results in a battlefield situation, therefore they are less efficient. What the army thinks about gays is not really an issue, so there was hardly any point mentioning it. Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Obviously it would be crude to suggest that the approaches are completely separate, and that no areas of overlap (or complete overlap) occur. However business is not intrinsically linked to one sex despite the chauvinist attitudes employed therein, but child birth and child care is. Quote:
One way is to measure the oxygen intake of the body, but I don't know what particular methods were used in the study, like I said it was a friend of mine who really got into this. I trust him and the academic staff not to be just talking out of their arses. Noone mentioned the only need for efficiency was in killing. Any task someone might find themselves doing during a war is affected. If your whole operation is nearly twice as slow as the enemy, you're screwed. Quote:
|
Quote:
You accuse me of being thick-headed while you seemingly couldn't understand a point that didn't originate in your own skull if it was rammed into your head a la clockwork orange. Let me reiterate my point to you, though. There is absolutely no scientific evidence that men are any less capable parents than woman. None. Not one shred that isn't completely anecdotal. I don't care if your friend wrote a million papers regarding a woman's ability to exert 80% more energy because that is not relevant. Even if it was, "I know a guy who says this" is rarely sufficient evidence for anything under any circumstances. Is that the clarity you've been begging for? Quote:
Now, feel free to respond by ignoring everything that i just said, like you seem to like to do. |
Quote:
Tune in next week to see if I ever get tired of quoting your ad homiem attacks, and posting the link to the forum rules beneath them. Stick to your arguement. I don't agree with a single word of it...but it's not so weak as to require personal insults. |
Quote:
Quote:
I know I'm crap at citing my sources, but I read an article in a science magazine about work done in India regarding intelligence. Something similar here. Basically the findings were that intelligence is linked to genetics. What this is saying is that your psychological make-up is strongly influenced by your physical make-up. It isn't an unreasonable suggestion that men and women are therefore psychologically different. These points are covered in the following articles (the 2nd one is particularly interesting). Men, Women More Different Than Thought Understanding The Difference Between Men And Women edit: you poor, poor people... I'm away for the rest of the week :rolleyes: |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Okay....now that we can get back to the topic.
Homophobia, is fear. Racism is fear. My question would be: What the hell are these people afraid of? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Funny....I do not remember accusing someone of cowardice, but instead a mindset, nor do I have an opponent. I was stating a fact (thus the meaning behind the term Phobia), and asking a question. If indeed you are implying that you are homophobic or racist, that would be a different story. Yet I would still prefer not to be considered an opponent, rather I would be very interested in finding out what the reasoning behing these feelings could be.
The only logical (to me) reason for either of these states of mind would be fear, as I dislike the term ignorance. Even the ignorant excuse is limited however, as one can always gain knowledge and subdue such things. Thus we are again left with fear, whether as suggested it is of a loss of power/control, or a fear of understanding that which is different. |
An article summing up my position quite nicely can be found here:
Orson Scott Card's take on homosexual marriage It is very long, so it is only for the very patient. It sums up my feelings on the subject in a more eloquent manner than I can. |
weee, internet :icare:
Quote:
Why don't you pick up on all the cases where people are blatantly lying. "Same-sex marriages do not suffer from problems of being weak relationships, complicated custody/inheritance/divorce settlements, birth defects or abuse within the relationship any more then normal heterosexual marriages." courtesy of Mantus. Where does this information come from? How did someone manage to study homosexual marriage when it isn't legal yet? Quote:
During the incest argument, you basically claim there must be some validity in the incest taboo because most people believe so. I don't know about where you live, but where I live most people would consider the mother the better parent. It would be very hard to prove, but that does not make it wrong by default. I have yet to see proof to the contrary. (Conveniently the burden of proof appears to fall on me every time, even when it seems so obvious to everyone else that their arguments are correct regardless of evidence.) |
The studies I found seem to support the same conclusion...
“People have assumed that the sex of the parent has a major effect on children’s development, but we found that isn’t the case,” he said. “Researchers need to focus on other factors, such as family resources, which seem to have a real impact.” The Ohio State University |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Parenting is about what you do, not who you are or what's between your legs. |
That was a short week. :|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat. Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall. All you can say is that women are different than men, and hope that everybody else makes the cognitive leap that you did by assuming that women are better parents than men. How is that even measurable? It's not as if the concept of "good parent" is a definitive one. Maybe you could start be defining what it means to be a good parent, and then making an argument as to why men are less capable of fulfilling those criteria. Quote:
Quote:
I'm sorry if you feel like you're being unfairly asked to back up your assertions with some sort of coherent logic, but that is part of the process of arguing. You make a statement as to the nature of reality, and then you back it up with logical statments. Quote:
All i can say is that OSC should stick to writing sci-fi. He assumes that tradition is valid simply because it exists. He assumes that humans are incapable of defining their relationships in terms other than those they learned form their parents. He spends a long time talking about the effects of divorce on children, which is completely irrelevant. He assumes that people can't act morally without the force of society's expectations weighing down on them. He claims that monogamy is definitively the most effective foundation for a civilization based on haphazard logic. He forgets that reproduction isn't that crucial to the marrying habits of society any more, we can choose when to have children. He seems to think that only men would benefit from monogamy. He sees at the root of every problem someone on the left. I guess in short i think osc is full of shit. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If determining the better parent was not measurable, I imagine a lot of these cases would come to a stalemate. A poll for www.actionforhealthykids.org resulted in 66% of people believing women are better parents. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
66% of people think there's green cheese on the moon. So? 2/3rds of people can believe anything, and it changes nothing.
If someone tells you every day of you life: "Men ALWAYS wash dishes. It's a manly thing to do." Do you think that you'd wash dishes? Natural advantage or not...you're ignoring a huge component of the debate, that gender roles are affected by our cultural understanding. There is much that has nothing to do with "natrual" but everything to do with how you were raised, the culture around you, and the values of that culture. |
Quote:
Quote:
Which is it to be? Quote:
Yes in the main part gender roles are affected by our history and traditions and the desire of men to beat women into subserviency. Men can cook and women can drive, but each has an inherent advantage over the other when it comes to certain things. |
Quote:
You are saying that society believes something so it is true because decisions are made upon those beliefs. I was saying that society believes something so if you want change to occur regarding that belief it is incombent upon the person to provide very convincing evidence to change that belief. These are not the same things at all. Now, for this: Quote:
There are serious problems with using divorce cases as a study into natural predisposition of humans. First, divorce cases are instances of failures of things working out between two adults, it has nothing to do with what makes for the best parenting for kids. Often the arrangements are made that the father has to pay child support and the woman keeps the children because the male earns more money and can support the child financially, and the woman can spend more time with the child. Does that have anything do with a nature predisposition? I could keep going, but I have to go teach a few classes. I'm sure that there will be more to respond to eventually, and if necessary I will go into further depth into why your process of determining whether women or men are better parents is flawed. |
Quote:
1. http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Sect...ontentID=17907 |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Firstly, the survey was not connected to my piece on court rulings, what people believe is what people believe and nothing more. Secondly, custody suits are determined on a case by case basis and not by some popular statistical formula. The case is evaluated to determine who the child will be better off with. The people who make up the judicial system are educated people who, due to the nature of their work, have to be less prejudiced than most people. Therefore the outcome is more likely to reflect the truth about those cases than you sitting there spouting off that either sex parent is equally capable. Thirdly, in the second part of that quote you say in order for change to occur based on their belief, they should provide very convincing evidence. The status quo is that women are regarded as better parents by the relevant authorities. You believe that men are equally good parents but offer no convincing evidence to that effect. Quote:
Is this a valid defence of the position? Surely when each individual case is determined, the outcome should reflect who is the better parent. What you are saying may well apply when the case is resolved amicably between the parents. For the remaining cases see the following passages: --- 3. The focus of the evaluation is on parenting capacity, the psychological and developmental needs of the child, and the resulting fit. In considering psychological factors affecting the best interests of the child, the psychologist focuses on the parenting capacity of the prospective custodians in conjunction with the psychological and developmental needs of each involved child. This involves (a) an assessment of the adults' capacities for parenting, including whatever knowledge, attributes, skills, and abilities, or lack thereof, are present; (b) an assessment of the psychological functioning and developmental needs of each child and of the wishes of each child where appropriate; and (c) an assessment of the functional ability of each parent to meet these needs, including an evaluation of the interaction between each adult and child. --- 6. The psychologist is aware of personal and societal biases and engages in nondiscriminatory practice. The psychologist engaging in child custody evaluations is aware of how biases regarding age, gender, race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, culture, and socioeconomic status may interfere with an objective evaluation and recommendations. The psychologist recognizes and strives to overcome any such biases or withdraws from the evaluation. quoted verbatim from APA Guidelines for Child Custody |
showing a case where bias has clearly ruled our legal system...and then hold it up as proof that the bias is fact? i don't think that works.
|
Quote:
|
I don't know. I'd probably agree that most judges are less prejudiced than most people; however, I believe most people are pretty darn predjudiced. MartinGuerre's point is interesting, and, given the information we have before us, I don't know if it's possible to say whether the courts give custody to women from bias or b/c it's best for the child. Perhaps it's both -- because society believes that the mother is more important, it's easier for the child to be with her. And, Adysav, you do realize that just because the guidelines enjoin lack of bias, doesn't mean that there will in fact be lack of bias. Note also that the guidelines are for psychologists, not judges. They manifestly do not support your position that women are better parents, and they do not support your contention that judges are fully impartial.
|
Perhaps the judges have access to some sort of top-secret scientific studies whose results once-and-for-all-time conclusively prove that all men are shitty parents. Yeah, that sounds about right.
Or, to put it less assholey, what do these judges know that we don't and where did they learn it? My bet's on nothing and nowhere. |
Quote:
Debating whether it's morally acceptable to be gay is quite passé. (In fact, morality itself is philosophically untenenable.) People are different, get over it. I hardly think gay couples cause you any harm--and, well, if you sit up late at night angsting over their activities, I'd say its your problem, not theirs. As for gay marriage, it's a smoke and mirrors trick to divert the electorate from the real issues: universal health care, Enron-esque robberbaroning, the privatization of the military, &c. Cheers! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Ah, yes, the APA. The people who, not too long ago, thought that lobotomy was an acceptable cure for depression. |
Would you believe the bloke that invented the lobotomy got a Nobel prize for his efforts. Oddly enough people still have brain surgery for psychiatric conditions.
From the guidelines the APA seem to run a reasonable operation as regards child custody, and not one mention of lobotomy :) I suppose you want me to concede that a child custody specialist can't possibly be an expert because 60 years ago someone in a related profession decided lobotomies were a good idea. |
Quote:
For all the psychology is, I don't think that in this instance it is indicative of what you're saying that it is indicative of. |
I think if there conclusive evidence supporting the idea that woman are better parents than men to any significant degree we would actually have a study to point to, rather than being forced to infer something indirectly from child custody cases where we have no knowledge of the actual details. Don't you think?
Or do you think that the knowledge of these child psychologist as to the superiority of the female specties in the area of child rearing is being actively suppressed? |
I believe the question was, "Is homosexuality philosophically wrong?"
The answer is, as this thread has demonstrated: What kind of philosophy do you believe in? |
wilbjammin & co, since you don't have any more decent criticisms of my argument perhaps you could share the treasure trove of evidence that disproves me.
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:53 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project