I guess all in all, what I wonder is what is more valuable, the woman or the pedestal she is placed on?

Quote from Popadibs

I guess all in all, what I wonder is what is more valuable, the woman or the pedestal she is placed on?

That "pedestal" are the men she stepped on to get there. A real woman needs no pedestal.

Quote from Traveler

No. I do not believe that I am more valuable than you just because I'm a female. In my opinion, every life is a treasure...it matters not whose life it is. If we were to talk about it seriously, as in a life/death situation, I would gladly die for my best friend who is male.

Why? Because I am single, have no dependents (unless you count pets), only have a good relationship with half of my extended family, and do not participate in any extracurricular activities where I'm exceptionally relied on (wildlife rehab).

My best friend on the other hand, is married with 3 children, has a good relationship with both his AND his wife's family, cares for his mother, and is relied on as a tutor. If it came down to only one of us living through a situation, I would want him to live as he has so much more to lose.

See?



Ummm...what is Lifeboat? It sounds like you're referring to a game or something, but I've never heard of it.

Added after 12 minutes:



What about all the time in between?
lol, just kidding Zuberi.

What exactly would make us better during particular times?
Are we more valuable because we can give birth? If so, remember that we need sperm to make a person in our wombs.
Is it because we did the "gathering" before agriculture was invented and ensured the tribe didn't get scurvy from lack of plant foods? If so, remember that the menfolk did do the big game hunting which was necessary for the protein of the diet.
Perhaps it's because we rear the children, and are better at caring for them? No...while many women are maternal and good with children, there are many who are not.
Maybe we have an innate ability to clean/dust/wash/cook better? Hey! I think I found it!
*kidding...I have no idea.*

Added to "ignore function"

Quote from FloatyBoaty

That "pedestal" are the men she stepped on to get there. A real woman needs no pedestal.

People can't really place themselves on pedestals. We place other people on pedestals with unrealistic expectations.

High horse, yes.

Quote from KellyMac

People can't really place themselves on pedestals. We place other people on pedestals with unrealistic expectations.

High horse, yes.

I enjoy looking at different faiths and seeing how their customs and ways are adapted to different situations that are constant in human life. From long ago, I am a distant admirer of Sri Ramakrishna and his ecumenical approach to faith and salvation, and more broadly have always believed that everyone we encounter is someone we can learn from.

On pedestaling people, Jehovah's Witnesses don't do birthdays or wedding rings or any kind of honoraria that spotlight the individual. At all, ever. Not "For He's a Jolly Good Fellow", not a surprise anniversary party for Mom & Dad's 50th, nothing. Not even Christmas, other than to mark the event itself in church for what it means to them. But no tree, presents, Santa Claus, etc.

And, if you discuss this ethos with Witnesses, most of whom make it very easy for others to do with them, they are absoutely at peace with and convinced of the rightness of this way, for precisely the reason you state, Kel, that no one belongs on a pedestal, artificially elevated above anyone else, ever.

Heartless? I don't think so. It looks damn shrewd to me, because they never have to deal with the constant and impossible task of meeting every occasion of the dozens of expensive and tedious and basically meaningless hoops we are expected to jump through every year, getting the wrong gift, inviting the wrong people and hurting others' feelings by excluding them, choosing the wrong decor for a party, WHAT-EVER. I hate every bit of it, and envy the JWs their plain common sense.

The one constant in all these occasions and pedestalizing? The cost. Whoever has something to sell for all this foolishness makes out every time. But the partygoers, from my perspective, are just going through the motions, for the sake of what not going through the motions might cost them socially or in bed. And for no other reason.

Decoding all this nonsense and dispensing with most of it would go a long way toward reducing tensions between the genders too, I am convinced. How much of a relationship is taken up in jumping through social hoops for others? For myself, I have excused myself from occasions and occasionism for years, and don't care any more who gets their little commercially-trained feelings hurt. I'm just glad to be free of it all.

I'd like to through away equality altogether, and instead fight for opposing balance. Like a see-saw has two sides that work in balance, so should male and female relationships. Each have their own role in life and don't cross into each others' domain.


Women are more valuable than men because men don't have a value. Women need men to live but men don't need women to live. Water doesn't have a value because we need water to live, but gold does because we don't need it to live.

Besides, folks should have enough self esteem to not be bothered by who thinks who is "better" or "more valuable" or whatever. Once one gets out of the comparison trap, then the limits disappear. Although it does become rather hard to meet people that are even close to your level.

Quote from FloatyBoaty

Besides, folks should have enough self esteem to not be bothered by who thinks who is "better" or "more valuable" or whatever. Once one gets out of the comparison trap, then the limits disappear. Although it does become rather hard to meet people that are even close to your level.

This is not a "self esteem" issue. It's a matter of the reason for a lot of the discrimination men face today being because of this society thinking this way. A woman's wants takes priority of a man's needs because she is viewed as more "valuable" and men are "better suited" to take care of their needs. If one wishes to get out of the comparison trap then how does this thread matter contribute to that?

Also, it's just plain stupid. The fact of the matter is that those of us who disagree don't disagree with women being more valuable because of self esteem issues; we disagree with women being more valuable because it's not proven fact and we don't believe it. That's like telling a Yankees fan that they lack self esteem for disagreeing with Mets fans for thinking the Mets are "better" or more "valuable" of a franchise when the Yankee fan disagrees because the Yankees are the most successful franchise in sports history.

We disagree because we have more evidence not to believe this than to believe this and not because we have "low self esteem" or because we're "not on your level". Claims that women are more valuable than men are doubtful at best and fictitious at worst. Most of the people who would believe women are more valuable than men are probably women, misandrists and manginas. In fact, I believe most women know better but don't want the men they desire to use to know better.

This is the definition of valuable from dicitonary.com

val·u·a·ble

   [val-yoo-uh-buhl, -yuh-buhl] Show IPA
adjective1.having considerable monetary worth; costing or bringing a high price: a valuable painting; a valuable crop.

2.having qualities worthy of respect, admiration, or esteem: avaluable friend.

3.of considerable use, service, or importance: valuableinformation.




Under which definition of valuable are women more valuable than men?

These "folks" aren't bothered by men believing that women are more valuable than they are. What bothers us is those same men trying to cram this foolishness down the throats of us men who disagree with this because we know better.

It seems I'm a good bit older than a lot of the folks here, and a lot of my frames of reference are unfamiliar, so I'll tell a story.

Thirty-eight years ago, as a ninth-grader in a public school in ultra-right Orange County, California, the teachers in the "Social Studies" classes had us kids play a game called Lifeboat.

The scenario was a boat on the high seas after a shipwreck, with no known hope of immediate rescue.

The class activity was to go through what was posed as each survivor's bio, where one was pregnant, one was elderly, one was desperately sick, had gangrene, etc,

Then inventory a given list of supplies and other factors supplied in the lesson plan by the school district,

And make a survival plan "for the good of all" by

Deciding who lives and who dies.

The structure of this debate was templated decades ago, and has been vastly successful in getting people who were not even born yet when I was fourteen, to think that how they think is nothing more than what they think.

Quote from Popadibs

This is the definition of valuable from dicitonary.com

val·u·a·ble

   [val-yoo-uh-buhl, -yuh-buhl] Show IPA
adjective1.having considerable monetary worth; costing or bringing a high price: a valuable painting; a valuable crop.

2.having qualities worthy of respect, admiration, or esteem: avaluable friend.

3.of considerable use, service, or importance: valuableinformation.


Under which definition of valuable are women more valuable than men?

2 & 3; though 1 could also be considered in some remote regions of space.

If you think women are more worthy of respect, admiration or esteem and are of more considerable use, service and importance then maybe this isn't really your kind of place.

Quote from Popadibs

If you think women are more worthy of respect, admiration or esteem and are of more considerable use, service and importance then maybe this isn't really your kind of place.

Well, I haven't found a real woman yet so I can only speculate on these things.

Quote from FloatyBoaty

Well, I haven't found a real woman yet so I can only speculate on these things.

I think that women have shown us what a "real" woman is. It's just up to you or I to accept it. Not all women are 100% alike but many women are alike in all the ways that truly matter.

Quote from Yan Yan

Yes you did. My post was not meant to be

Quote from Yan Yan

adversarial but merely to question.

Quote from Yan Yan

The 'stranger' is obviously me. "Halfway across the globe" is a deliberate and insulting term. Halfway from where? The font of all wisdom? Centre of the universe? Am I too far away from the trivial intricacies of US domestic politics to have any credibility at all?
As such, am I dismissed as a 'third world' resident. So, if I don't believe that statistics in the western world are manipulated for political purposes, that just shows how ignorant I am?
Why would you wear your western insularity as a badge of pride?

Yet, you are completely adversarial, assumed I was attacking you personally, & automatically jump to the worst conclusion and character attacks.

The stranger IS ME. I am a stranger, halfway across the globe, in a country of rampant propaganda and surely ignorant of the intricacies of foreign affairs and daily lives of the citizens of each country. I am a stranger to many countries, I am a stranger to the world. Yes, that was denigrating, toward myself. Not toward you.

"The world is definitely not the U.S. and vice versa which is why I split the subjects up with a paragraph and clearly labelled from whence the statistics were derived (the U.S.) so that members of "the world" could bring in their own relevant experiences, perspectives and statistics (which are probably more accurately reported to them than a stranger halfway across the globe.)"
antimisandry.com Men are better than women

Here is the point, local news is usually more thorough at covering local issues. People in my nation are not going to hear as much detail about other countries as people in those countries and vice versa. People in my state don't get as much information about other states as their own state, and vice versa. People in my city won't have as much information about other cities as their own city. Hence, I brought my information clearly labelled as "from U.S." and not applicable to global community as a whole. I pointed out that the global community is far better prepared to offer relevant statistics and experiences from their countries because they have FIRST hand information, not limited secondhand information from a news agency in another country.

But you insisted on seeing this obvious truth (one you yourself stated) as slight to you? You have better access to knowledge about your community and are better educated about the history, politics and culture of your nation than I could ever hope to be. Even if I moved to your nation there will be a cultural barrier and I may never understand the subtleties of growing up in your community. Things that are so obvious to a member of your community would go over my head. I would not have the subtext to discern the full meaning in context.

So how is that an insult? How is it an insult to label clearly where I got my information and not to automatically apply it to the global community, as it is a localized study? How is it an insult to invite members of the world community to share their knowledge, resources and perspective? I already admitted everything you said (but you resorted to unfriendly, biased ranting) that as an member of a different country (not just America), as a stranger to most countries and their way of life, I am not qualified to represent myself -- let alone pretend to know your experiences, or represent myself as an expert on affairs of other nations or the global community.

Quote from Yan Yan

As for pet peeves, I have only one. American women believe that the entire world should be ordered according to their personal likes and dislikes. If any race, religion, culture, nation or any revolutionary group whatsoever dares to raise objections, they'll call upon their fathers and big brothers to bomb the 'enemy' out of existence. But you're just an 'oppressed woman' so it's not your concern. Neat trick!

Only American women have this issue? There are not American men who think this way or British women with global myopia? Neat trick setting up an imaginary straw-woman to martyr you and then tie me into one big stereotype. Who is assuming things about people in other countries now? Who is making rude assumptions about other people just because they are from a certain country or place?

Quote from Yan Yan

But since I'm "halfway around the globe" with a vibrant family that needs to eat every day, what would I really know about the misery of pathetic, 'oppressed' western women? Some of us have never been to Disneyland and wouldn't wan't to.
What do you know about "social dynamics" in your own country? Are they assumed as 'normal' and taken for granted? Come on. Nobody's fooled.

I know more about my country than you do, and vice versa. That is the point.
But maybe not, I guess I can't be American since I've never been to Disneyland or Disneyworld! Because that isn't a stereotype...?

How are "American women" supposed to redeem themselves if they can frankly admit that they, like all citizens of the world, are limited by their own experiences and do not know as much about other countries as they do their own, and do not have the power to dictate to others what their life, culture and politics are like but can only ask and hope a reasonable discourse of shared information is started? How can they participate in the global community and learn about other nations if "American women are no good"-stereotype blocks discourse from ever occurring?

What you have revealed to me is an intense hatred of American women based on intolerant stereotypes. Your "pet peeve" is prejudiced and intolerant and it automatically forbids discourse from a group of people based on where they grew up.
You have preconceived notions and you automatically assume the worse and that I was judged the moment I said "U.S." and that you are so wound up that you may never see we were agreeing because you are fighting the "American woman." Yet you say you dislike people painting the world in their myopic views and dislike assumptions being made about the rest of the world based on a person's limited experience.

Who is judging who based on their limited knowledge and experience with another country?

My pet peeve is hypocrites.

Pheew! After 4 long months, I get a collection of cherry-picked comments with no reference to context?
That is not reasoned debate. I can't answer something I might have used long ago, to support a totally different discussion.

and character attacks

. Please supply details of my "character attacks". I joke with friends sometimes, but only when we've reached a certain level of understanding. Otherwise I'm always polite.

Here is the point, local news is usually more thorough at covering local issues. People in my nation are not going to hear as much detail about other countries as people in those countries and vice versa. People in my state don't get as much information about other states as their own state, and vice versa. People in my city won't have as much information about other cities as their own city. Hence, I brought my information clearly labelled as "from U.S." and not applicable to global community as a whole. I pointed out that the global community is far better prepared to offer relevant statistics and experiences from their countries because they have FIRST hand information, not limited secondhand information from a news agency in another country.

Some confusion here. Are you refererring to States (U.S.) or sovereign states in the world? Are you assuming a similarity that doesn't exist?

But you insisted on seeing this obvious truth (one you yourself stated) as slight to you? You have better access to knowledge about your community than I ever-- will unless I move there. Even then, there will be a cultural barrier and I may never understand the subtleties of growing up in your community. Things that are so obvious to a member of your community would go over my head. I would not have the subtext to discern the full meaning in context.

I'm doing my best but I really don't understand your argument. As I see it, I praise and criticisize my homeland in equal measure. But you still presume to crititisize other countries with no understanding whatsoever about how they survive and live their lives? You've never been there or lived there but you want to advocate how they should think??
When it comes to my 'adopted' homeland, I tend to praise, since why else would I be here? Despite all the ugly shit and government corruption, family values
still prevail.

Only American women have this issue? There are not American men who think this way or British women with global myopia? Neat trick setting up an imaginary straw-woman to martyr you and then tie me into one big stereotype. Who is assuming things about people in other countries now? Who is making rude assumptions about other people just because they are from a certain country or place?

Is that really the beef??

What are we "allowed" to say?? ... according to your own perception of political correctness?

AM is a global community. When gender relations are discussed, American women are often, rightly or wrongly, used as shining examples of the extreme.
Nobody gives a fiddler's fart about what husbands and wives do in Bangladesh or Ethiopia.

The 'baddies' are always in the western media but still regarded as heroines and victims. On a board such as this the failings of those individial women are highlighted as a feeble reaction to the wholesale political marginalisation and demonization of men.

Women that live outside of Feminist-Utopia-Disneyland in "other countries", (i.e. beyond the range of your feminist telescope) actually believe that they rather have a husband and father than a sperm-doning, taxpayer.)
Still don't get it Ms Eidolon?? You wouldn't because you're still comfortably 'inside the bubble'..It's not your fault. The 'patriarchy' corrupted your education and it's all mens fault.

Comment welcome. But please try and make it semi-intelligible next time..