[Gaborn]

By Roger Ebert Women are nicer than men. There are exceptions. Most people of both sexes are probably fairly nice, given the nature of their upbringing and opportunities. But in terms of their lifelong natures, women are kinder, more empathetic, more generous. And the sooner more of them take positions of power, the better our chances as a species. This occurred to me while watching a forthcoming movie named "Where Do We Go Now?" It could have occurred during dozens or hundreds of movies. It's set in a tiny village in Lebanon, where Christians and Muslims have lived peacefully side-by-side for generations. Now the local men have become worked up by strife they see on TV, and have decided that even in their village, without any provocation, they need to start hating and fighting each other. The women are tired of burying their sons and husbands. They conspire to distract the men from their foolish chest-beating. They stage fake miracles. They sneak hashish into their diets. In a bold masterstroke, they import a troupe of exotic Ukrainian dancers who are touring Lebanon. Enough about the movie, except for this simple mind experiment: Can you imagine a movie in which Muslim and Christian women start fighting with religion as their excuse, and the men band together to import go-go boys? Not easily. The gender roles in the film seem to go without saying. I've been noticing news items lately about how women are gaining in many ways. They now represent a majority of U.S. college students, and 60% of all graduate students. Their income levels are rising, although they still don't have parity with men. They are far less involved in violent crimes, and crime of all sorts. They are safer drivers. A child in a single-parent home is likely to be better off if the parent is a women. In the U.S. the odds are that 80% of the single parents will be women; having given birth, they stick around to raise children, while men are more likely to be missing. I could bore you with more statistics, but I doubt you need convincing. Most of these things are intuitively true. I believe that a great many things can be explained by the process of evolution, and differences in the sexes are certainly included. We are the descendants of primitive hunting and gathering societies. Men are better are hunting, and women are better at gathering. Men are taller, heavier, stronger. They're not in the child-rearing business. Because we do not often think of ourselves as animals, it is rather wonderful that women retain one function from their evolutionary past. They have breasts, and use them to feed infants. Think about that. In terms of body weight, they tend to have larger breasts than most mammals, although breast size has no particular relationship to feeding ability. One obvious reason for larger breasts, therefore, is to send a signal to prospective mates that they are promising candidates for motherhood. You may not realize this when you see a crowd of half-loaded guys in a lap-dance joint, but in some primeval sense they're looking for mothers--perhaps their own. Women know things like that. Dogs understand humans by closely observing us. They follow our eyeliners, and discover what interests us. Women understand men in the same way. They observe the whole man, while men tend to focus more on secondary sexual characteristics and signals of availability. This is why a woman is more willing to marry an ugly man than a man is to marry an ugly woman. The woman is looking for reliability, responsibility, bread-winning. The man is looking for boobs. But enough about evolution. Consider the role of the sexes in modern times. Men no longer need to be powerful and violent in order to hunt bison, walk behind a plow, tote that barge or lift that bale. In a society where the hunting and gathering is done by corporations, they need to be smart and work well with others. As leaders, they must be wise about human nature, compassionate about those working for them, empathetic with the needs of consumers. These are areas in which men are not necessarily better equipped than women. A great deal of male drive is fueled by testosterone. A man wants to defeat other men and become the leader of the pack. He wants to scatter his seed far and wide. In these times he can demonstrate his potency not by fathering 50 children, but by driving profit margins higher and higher. This drive is more fundamental in business than worker happiness or customer satisfaction. Nowhere is this more clearly demonstrated than in the financial industry. Investment bankers do nor sow, and neither do they reap. They make nothing but profits. They create those profits through the stock ownership of companies that do make and sell things, but at their level they hardly care if they're making tractors or dildos. The recent trading catastrophe at J. P. Morgan had nothing to do with making anything. It was a pissing contest in which an executive wanted to produce a big number on a balance sheet, in order to justify still more millions in bonuses on top of his already obscene wealth. If he was gambling with the well-being of his bank and its customers, tough shit. Am I foolish in suggesting that women don't think quite so easily in the same way? They like to compete and succeed, yes, but in their natures I believe they're also aware of human issues. Women are not quite so quick as men to grow enraged at the idea of raising the hourly wage. For most men, the minimum wage is important largely because of its impact on profits. I believe more women consider its effect on helping wage-earners support their families. In the economic climate we inhabit, not many CEOs are prepared to stand up at a shareholder meeting and say: Our profits are down this year because we improved the pay of our employees, reduced costs for our customers, and caused less harm to the environment. That'll be the day. Much more likely is: We have record profits because we exported jobs to poor countries, fought labor unions and continue to pack fewer corn flakes in larger boxes. In recent decades, corporations have taken over a commanding role in our society. In the era of deregulation started by Reagan and continued by both parties, corporate balance sheets have justified economic practices that are cruel and heartless. Consider the mortgage crisis, when we now know worthless debt was deliberately sold to investors by those who knew it was worthless, with the result that many people lost their money and many more lost their homes. This was clearly fraud and theft. Why aren't there more bankers and financiers in prison? Am I wrong to suspect part of our situation has been caused testosterone--that men in power believe moderation and reasonable compromise reflect on their masculinity? I think you can see that many places in our society, for example in the joyless and punishing excesses of college and professional sports. Many sports fans are in a sense the "owners" of the teams they support, and if their favorite athletes suffer brain damage in the process of winning a Super Bowl, that's a price they'll cheerfully pay. Religion is anther area in which men are responsible for mischief. Judaism, Christianity and Islam were founded by patriarchal desert tribes, and male supremacy was reflected in their theology. In many fundamentalist sects, wives are taught to be subservient to their husbands. To obey. Why? Catholics, Muslims and traditional Jews restrict their priesthoods to men. Why? Why must the god of all humans be approached only through men? My feeling is that a fundamental shift is taking place. Women were not well-adapted for leadership roles in primitive and early historical times. But our emerging world economy is becoming less based on physical strength and more dependent on intelligence and emotional balance. Women are not wired to see disagreement as a challenge to themselves. Women value common welfare above singular success. Women are more open to cooperation than competition. Women have evolved to focus more on prudent long-term survival, and less on immediate gains. When women give birth and spend months suckling an infant, they understand better that we all depend on each other. They're programmed to nurture the defenseless, plan for the future, value others for their qualities rather than for their externals. Yes, these are generalizations. I am more right than wrong. Mothers' Day, 2012.

From Here

I thought it might generate some interesting discussion.

[DanteFox]

this will end well.

[ElectricBlue187]

oh how the mighty hath fallen

[Fari]

Devolution is banned, so I wonder how this thread will turn out without her.

[apana]

Two thumbs up for women, it kind of breaks down in the second half though.

edit: freudian slip

[Gaborn]

oh how the mighty hath fallen

I just thought it was an interesting topic. I post a lot of interesting topics.

[Horse Detective]

I feel like feminism and equality movements in general never come without a few people who take it to the extreme in believing whatever they are defending is superior in some way.

I really hope no one agrees with what the title insists.

[CFMOORE!]

Devolution is banned, so I wonder how this thread will turn out without her.

it will contain about 543 less "fuck"s

[RawPower]

This is going to end badly. Very badly.

[corporate cheerleader]

I just thought it was an interesting topic. I post a lot of interesting topics.

At least it's something else than DEATH DESPAIR DESTRUCTION, haha ;)

[The Awesomest]

Devolution is banned, so I wonder how this thread will turn out without her.

What happened to her?

[soepje]

I only read the first two sentences, but i agree already.. i approve of this thread.

[Bombadil]

Women tend to engage in relational aggression while men tend to engage in physical aggression.

At least with a man, I can expect punches and kicks and all sorts of physical violence.

With a woman, I always have to wonder what she's going to do to get back at me. She'll spread a rumor and ruin my reputation. She'll tell her friends I'm inadequate.

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. They'll smile at you and destroy your life without raising a finger.

This article reminds me of the comic series, "Y: The Last Man."

[ElectricBlue187]

I just thought it was an interesting topic. I post a lot of interesting topics.

I was talking about Ebert. I Hated Hated Hated reading this drivel

[Gaborn]

At least it's something else than DEATH DESPAIR DESTRUCTION, haha ;)

Well, I have thrown in some puppies here and there :-P

electricblue - leave me my delusions of grandeur I did know that, that's why I essentially said the same thing as in my OP

[Master Milk]

Women are better than different from men.

Yea, there we go.

[Y2Kev]

Who doesn't acknowledge this? Men are so bad.

Read this: http://www.amazon.com/Why-Women-Shou.../dp/0061140406

[shira]

And hermaphrodites are better than men but worse than women?

[Kuro Madoushi]

Women tend to engage in relational aggression while men tend to engage in physical aggression. At least with a man, I can expect punches and kicks and all sorts of physical violence. With a woman, I always have to wonder what she's going to do to get back at me. She'll spread a rumor and ruin my reputation. She'll tell her friends I'm inadequate. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. They'll smile at you and destroy your life without raising a finger. This article reminds me of the comic series, "Y: The Last Man."

Reminds me of this manipulative bitch of an ex coworker
All friendly to me and seemed to be on my side and supported my issues
I leave? Oh, he talks too much. He complained too much.

Well...when your questions are "did you think that was wrong?" "I can believe she did that, what do you think?" "I can't believe they treat people like this...what do you think?"

[Carcetti]

Women and men would both be better off without the cages of learned behavior, cultural stereotyping and even the well-intentioned stuff Ebert here tries to sell. Unless of course we're just pure biological robots instead of thinking beings.

[out0v0rder]

i was told everyone is equal

[Tesseract]

preach it, brother.

i, for one, welcome our new sexy overlords.

[apana]

At least it's something else than DEATH DESPAIR DESTRUCTION, haha ;)

Tomorrow's thread: "Flesh eating bacteria agree with Roger Ebert, women are indeed better than men".

[cashman]

Devolution is banned, so I wonder how this thread will turn out without her.

probably with less name calling and insults

[ZenaxPure]

Lost me at the first sentence to be honest. I've no thoughts on this topic as a whole (that I want to write here anyway) one way or the other, but most women I've met are not "nicer than men".

Maybe I've just had bad luck.

[BeesEight]

Ebert really needs to stop commentating on things that aren't movie related.

Also - Margaret Thatcher.

But hey, as far as silly generalizations go this is probably the most expected one held in the general conscious of modern society.

[ItAintEasyBeinCheesy]

Well they are a lot better looking and smelling for the most part.

[Baconsammy]

probably with less name calling and insults

Truth.

My niece informs me that girls are made from sugar and spice and everything nice, whereas boys are made from slugs and snails and puppy-dog tails. Maybe that's where Roger got his info.

[Corky]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ussCHoQttyQ

[ElTopo]

Oh, is it sexism time already ?

Edit:
We men have brought geniuses like Gauss or Newton upon this world, that's gotta be worth some points.

[xbhaskarx]

Devolution is banned, so I wonder how this thread will turn out without her.

Half as many comments, for starters.

[Valnen]

Devolution is banned, so I wonder how this thread will turn out without her.

Wait really? Why?

[H.Protagonist]

Well, now that we have Ebert's endorsement the time of our rule is surely nigh...!

[corporate cheerleader]

Tomorrow's thread: "Flesh eating bacteria agree with Roger Ebert, women are indeed better than men".

*googles* Oh, you silly Psyduck!

[BertramCooper]

Women tend to engage in relational aggression while men tend to engage in physical aggression. At least with a man, I can expect punches and kicks and all sorts of physical violence. With a woman, I always have to wonder what she's going to do to get back at me. She'll spread a rumor and ruin my reputation. She'll tell her friends I'm inadequate. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. They'll smile at you and destroy your life without raising a finger. This article reminds me of the comic series, "Y: The Last Man."

I would mostly agree with this.

Because of their physical inferiority to men (not meant as an insult), women have become far better than men at emotional and intellectual manipulation.

Women have the potential to be universally superior to men, as they're clearly more intelligent, more diligent, and more ambitious. But it won't happen across the board until women in oppressive cultures achieve some level of independence.

[shadowsdarknes]

Devolution is banned, so I wonder how this thread will turn out without her.

It will be half as fun for sure.

[-PXG-]

Women are better than different from men. Yea, there we go.

/thread

[apana]

Well I have had many women tell me that video games aren't art. Surely a nefarious alliance is being forged, Roger Ebert and teh girlz versus us gaming bros.

[sebajuNujabes]

Well men, we had a good run. It's time to pack it in.

[vicissitudes]

Next up: Black people are better than white people.

[CFMOORE!]

Well men, we had a good run. It's time to pack it in.

mine wont fit back there.

[MidnightCowboy]

Maybe it's because I'm in college, actually, I'm fairly certain that's why, but women seem to complicate things a lot. They get hung up on the strangest things. Men on the other hand generally keep it pretty simple.

[grumble]

Article is bullshit.

Aside from the extremely naive stakeholder view of corporations instead of the shareholder view, his sweeping generalizations of women and their superiority come with their own caveats.

What about the 'emotional instability' of women? What about the lack of women to make the 'hard decisions' or how they stay away from the 'jobs which require competition'? If he wants to throw down silly and inaccurate generalizations, then I can too.

What about the idea that what it takes to claw your way up to the top of an organization also results in certain kinds of people making it there; the driven, self-interested and psychotically hard-working people who got there because they are driven to win, and they use that personality when directing their organizations? It's a personality that succeeds through competition, not cooperation and self-effacement. Male or female, this tends to hold true.

Women are more educated than men in university right now, and if they didn't decide to have children they might well equal men in income. Why ARE there more women in university? Has anyone looked into this? Why are men not going? What programs are most dominated by women versus men?

[RBH]

That's a nice attention-grabbing thread title.

[toxicgonzo]

Women are nicer than men. There are exceptions. Most people of both sexes are probably fairly nice, given the nature of their upbringing and opportunities. But in terms of their lifelong natures, women are kinder, more empathetic, more generous. And the sooner more of them take positions of power, the better our chances as a species.

Ok, I'll bite. Nicer isn't always better.

This is an anecdote so take with it what you will:
I played a game of Monopoly with my women friends. When Jenny landed on Martha's property, she owed $1200. Martha was nice, and she said just give me $600 plus that property of yours which did not equal a value of $1200 nor did it give her monopoly powers for that area.

When Martha landed on my property, she owed $1500. I said that'll be $1500. She was mad I did not offer her a way out like she did to Jenny. I said I was just playing the game. And I won though Martha could have beaten me.


I see the game of Monopoly like I see life (sort of, it's not a perfect analogy). Not just in Monopoly but other board games, the women avoided confrontation with each other even if it was not to their advantage.
On the other hand, I was out to win and I didn't care if my plays made them dislike me for it.

Sometimes, it takes a man to make unfavorable decisions that are disconnected from relationships and emotions.

(in before lol generalizations, etc.)

[giga]

Am I foolish in suggesting that women don't think quite so easily in the same way? They like to compete and succeed, yes, but in their natures I believe they're also aware of human issues. Women are not quite so quick as men to grow enraged at the idea of raising the hourly wage. For most men, the minimum wage is important largely because of its impact on profits. I believe more women consider its effect on helping wage-earners support their families. In the economic climate we inhabit, not many CEOs are prepared to stand up at a shareholder meeting and say: Our profits are down this year because we improved the pay of our employees, reduced costs for our customers, and caused less harm to the environment. That'll be the day. Much more likely is: We have record profits because we exported jobs to poor countries, fought labor unions and continue to pack fewer corn flakes in larger boxes.

This is specific to men, why?

Am I wrong to suspect part of our situation has been caused testosterone--that men in power believe moderation and reasonable compromise reflect on their masculinity? I think you can see that many places in our society, for example in the joyless and punishing excesses of college and professional sports. Many sports fans are in a sense the "owners" of the teams they support, and if their favorite athletes suffer brain damage in the process of winning a Super Bowl, that's a price they'll cheerfully pay.

[JDSN]

He is just caught up in mother's day's spirit, some of the examples are really weird, for starters i dont think CEOs are activelly looking for people to fuck with, its also pretty naive and kinda sexist that he thinks women cant be ruthless on the work enviroment.

Devolution is banned, so I wonder how this thread will turn out without her.

That dude with the johan liebert avatar wont have someone toblindy cheer at and copy oppinions from.

[Baconsammy]

Well men, we had a good run. It's time to pack it in.

But then who's going to kill the spiders in the bathroom for my wife and daughter?!

[dojokun]

Ok, I'll bite. Nicer isn't always better. This is an anecdote so take with it what you will: I played a game of Monopoly with my women friends. When Jenny landed on Martha's property, she owed $1200. Martha was nice, and she said just give me $600 plus that property of yours which did not equal a value of $1200 nor did it give her monopoly powers for that area. When Martha landed on my property, she owed $1500. I said that'll be $1500. She was mad I did not offer her a way out like she did to Jenny. I said I was just playing the game. And I won though Martha could have beaten me. I see the game of Monopoly like I see life (sort of, it's not a perfect analogy). Not just in Monopoly but other board games, the women avoided confrontation with each other even if it was not to their advantage. On the other hand, I was out to win and I didn't care if my plays made them dislike me for it. Sometimes, it takes a man to make unfavorable decisions that are disconnected from relationships and emotions. (in before lol generalizations, etc.)

The fundamental difference is that in life, it's not a competition like Monopoly is. In Monopoly only one person can win, and that's why you compete until there is no one to co-exist with. In life, it's the opposite. We're supposed to co-exist.

[Ecotic]

Women historically have been hugely disadvantaged by most every human society. But still, this shouldn't mean we have to discount or argue against the value and worth of men. Every human ideally deserves their chance at life's happiness. The chance to achieve success, express empathy, enjoy making love to someone special, marry and have children. Both men and women deserve their chance at these things.