"Males are more willing to sacrifice life's other rewards for status dominance than are females."
That's exactly what I said. A long time ago.
"Cleaning a rifle and preparing Spaghetti-Os are not instinctive abilities."
Glad we cleared THAT up. I had been wondering.
"The woman who wishes to become President has a sufficient number of real-life equivalents to know that there is not a constraint rendering impossible a female head of state. But there is no more reason for such a woman to deny that the motivation to rule is more often associated with male physiology than there is for the six-foot woman to pretend that women are as tall as men."
Sure. Because a lot of women don't want to sacrifice the remainder of their lives in order to be dominant in some field or another. The urge to be dominant is a function of testosterone. Women don't have as much testosterone as men, and so are free to focus on many functions in life - not just becoming dominant in one field. I'd be willing to bet that if men didn't have so much testosterone, they would love to raise the kids and cook more often, b/c the majority of people of both sexes would agree that those are pleasurable activities...men just don't seem to have time for them, b/c they're focused elsewhere. When a woman chooses to be dominant, she can be, but that's a matter of choice - she chooses to focus on one thing. Most men are forced to, and so become dominant in society by default.
Your focus on male dominance is funny to me, b/c it's just a function of your testosterone. Your insistence that men are somehow superior b/c they have more testosterone is absurd. If women were injected daily with the hormone, I'm sure they'd all clamor to play your reindeer games, and I'm sure they'd come out on top just as often as men. Equal intelligence, just different hormones.
"No one doubts that women can be doctors."
Except Caligula, in this very thread.
By the way, isn't Amazon.com the most popular site on the net? :)
- TC
Post a response to this discussion thread