You're confusing. Why say "You must mean lesbian, not homosexual"? — Michael

It was meant to be a funny comment hence the " :P " .

You are clearly in great need of absolution. Try a Catholic website. — unenlightened

Are you talking from experience? >:)

Pope Francis and the Dalai Lama are both good leaders and I don't think either one of them is AGGRESSIVE (capitalized for high testosterone levels). — Bitter Crank

Are you sure?

There are some unfortunate facts about submissiveness. One is that women are literally and figuratively beaten into submission. This has not changed over the millenniums and is still with us today. The use and threat of force/coercion looms very large in the female intellect. Sometimes it is physical – sometimes it is psychological – and many times both. Women are cautious – for good reason – throughout all societies. Most women are very aware of the dangers that surround them. Women don’t go -anywhere - without thinking about their security. This fact escapes most men. A white man will think twice about strolling down the streets of Harlem. So, most white men never entertain the idea of going to Harlem. They pursue their lives within the confines of environments that they know to be ok. Most women do not have that luxury. A woman can find herself compromised physically, psychologically or both – just about anywhere.

Do you think young pretty girls like being called “sexy” in the mall? I think that many probably do. However, have you ever considered the message that these girls receive and inculcate? Is it all just harmless? No, it is not. Girls – women are aware they are objects of sexual attention. Many maybe most like the attention – but all are aware that the attention can cross the line of propriety. All women know that things can go south in a hurry. As a man – when was the last time you thought about being raped on the street? Probably – never. All women think about it – and - a large percentage – everyday.

The statistics and stories are all over the internet. Here is one article which has a global perspective:

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2016-10-20/violence-against-women-in-5-charts

So, what is my point? Women are sexual objects – is that going to change? Never. Does anybody want it to change? No. When you see an absolutely beautiful woman walking down the street – what do you think? I might think to myself something like – “I would love to taste that”. Is this wrong? I don’t think so. I might even try to start up a polite conversation and I might be bold enough to say something like – “you have the most beautiful red hair”. I am sure at this point the woman would politely disengage the conversation and be on her way. Each of us would retain a memory of this exchange. I would be further fantasying about the red head. The red head would be putting a picture in her mind of caution. Do you see the difference of how women and men think?

I am most certainly not married or dating a woman, as I am not homosexual. If you had read anything else that I wrote, it would be obvious that I am a woman and that I strongly advocate for not assuming that all women are gentle and nurturing all the time. — Lone Wolf

I didn't realize you are a woman when I wrote that comment. I would have stated it differently, but it doesn't change the sentiment that I was expressing about your statements:

most women are mostly gentle — Lone Wolf

Some women have a way of making a man think he is in control, but in reality the guy does what the girl wants anyway. That would seem like a very skillful way of dominating. And the guy is not any the wiser...lol. — Lone Wolf

Both are wrong-headed. The second, as I said before, is creepy.

When you see an absolutely beautiful woman walking down the street – what do you think? — Thinker

"She's beautiful, so what? Nihil Perditi."

I might think to myself something like – “I would love to taste that”. Is this wrong? — Thinker

Yes it is wrong, and very stupid. What would you have gained by "tasting that"? What's the most that you can gain? You'll have sex with that most beautiful woman for a night. The next day she'll be gone. What use is that? Do you enjoy losing? Or what's happening with you? Really, are you so attracted by the carrot that you cannot see how the closer you get the farther it gets? :s I mean sure, if she'd be yours for all eternity, you would be an idiot not to go for it. But otherwise it's wasted effort. Why do you want to waste your own energy because you lack discipline? You know that beauty isn't a guarantee of undying and eternal love right? In fact, the two have little to do with one another. So if you can't have her forever, why have sex with her for one night? If you can't completely have her, why deceive yourself, why humiliate yourself? So that you can regret losing her for the rest of your days? :s It seems to me quite frankly that even from a purely pragmatic point of view (not spiritual) you'd be an idiot to do that. It's like in a business deal I choose the course of action that will permit me to be a millionaire for one night, and then go many millions in debt for the rest of my life. That's very stupid.

You'll tell your friends - "yeah, 5 years ago I was a big boss, I shagged this absolutely beautiful girl" - and where are you now? A fuckin' drunkard that everyone ignores in a pub, remembering the good ole' days when you thought you were somebody...

I might even try to start up a polite conversation and I might be bold enough to say something like – “you have the most beautiful red hair”. I am sure at this point the woman would politely disengage the conversation and be on her way. — Thinker

She might not disengage, because she finds you attractive (or she's pissed off at her boyfriend, or some other petty, and meaningless reason, that no doubt you'll make much more meaningful than it really is), and then, well, then believe it or not, you can go run a little shagathon together ;)

T Clark, if you were Hanover I would THWAP you for being naïve but since you aren't Hanover, let me just say that what Lone Wolf was saying in the quote you posted, is directly out of the Female Players Handbook. Each gender has their own 'Players Handbook' and I am pretty sure you would recognize a page out of the males, as quickly as I can pick out the page of the females.
Think back to when you were dating a woman who you thought was the greatest person ever because she seemed to know what you wanted and thought what you wanted was a great idea herself. ;) — ArguingWAristotleTiff

In my experience, statements like yours and Augustino's come from men who are resentful of women and who don't like them very much. As the saying goes, expressed by I don't know whom - Men are from Illinois, women are from Indiana.

In my experience, statements like yours and Augustino's come from men who are resentful of women and who don't like them very much. As the saying goes, expressed by I don't know whom - Men are from Illinois, women are from Indiana. — T Clark

Mate you're just being stupid now. Tiff is a woman for fuck's sake >:O You really have no clue of the world around you *shakes head* ... You said you're not very self-motivated, well it shows by how brainwashed you seem to be, sorry to tell you.

>:O Mr. Clark, I already cited that less than 5% of Fortune 500 company CEOs are women. — Agustino

And as Michael stated, and I agreed, that evidence is weak and illogical.

Sorry, none of that sounds like great leadership. — Agustino

So, only CEOs, presidents of countries, and generals are leaders? Here is the definition of leadership - The action of leading a group of people or an organization. The state or position of being a leader.

You've just miss-defined the word "leadership" as a way of making your argument sound stronger than it is.

You are aware you are speaking to a woman here in that comment right? Really, you don't even know what the hell you're doing Mr. Clark. You're completely in the dark. No clue what's going on around you. No clue. — Agustino

There is no relevant, substantive information or argument in your statement. I have noted that you have a tendency, when someone doesn't buy your argument, to turn to statements about that person's personal characteristics.

Or as that great philosopher Pee Wee Herman so aptly stated - I know you are, but what am I?

Mate you're just being stupid now. Tiff is a woman for fuck's sake >:O You really have no clue of the world around you *shakes head* ... You said you're not very self-motivated, well it shows by how brainwashed you seem to be, sorry to tell you. — Agustino

I'm fairly new to this website, so I don't know who all the personnel are yet. I guess I just expect that stupid, unsupported statements insulting to women come from men like you. That doesn't make me stupid, naïve maybe.

As I said in my previous post, when you can't convince people with your arguments, you insult them. Satisfying, I'm sure, but it undermines your credibility.

I didn't realize you are a woman when I wrote that comment. I would have stated it differently, but it doesn't change the sentiment that I was expressing about your statements:

most women are mostly gentle — Lone Wolf

Some women have a way of making a man think he is in control, but in reality the guy does what the girl wants anyway. That would seem like a very skillful way of dominating. And the guy is not any the wiser...lol. — Lone Wolf

Both are wrong-headed. The second, as I said before, is creepy. — T Clark

What sentiment? That I don't know what it is like to be a woman or how we think?
I never said that all women are mostly gentle, if you finish reading the sentence... As for being wrong-headed, do you know any women? Are you married to or dating a woman? You seem to be very ignorant of women.

And as Michael stated, and I agreed, that evidence is weak and illogical. — T Clark

Why is it weak and illogical?

So, only CEOs, presidents of countries, and generals are leaders? — T Clark

No, but only they are GREAT leaders. Everyone else doesn't really count, they're virtually nothing in terms of leadership.

Look, if I make $30K a year and you make $80K a year, we're pretty much both equal financially. Nothing big. You wouldn't be a big moneymaker for making $80K while I make $30K. That's pennies. If someone is making $350K a year however, now we're talking about someone starting to become a big boy. Until you're making that much, you're pretty much a nothing financially. When I see people very proud that they're making $80K a year, I always laugh at them. They don't realise that that's pennies in reality. So it's good to know where you objectively stand. You don't say you're a great leader because you run a fucking unit in a hospital. That's BS, but of course people like to feel great about themselves instead of accept the reality of their situation.

As I said in my previous post, when you can't convince people with your arguments, you insult them. Satisfying, I'm sure, but it undermines your credibility. — T Clark

Well, I think you should be worried about YOUR credibility, not mine. You're certainly very funny though.

Are you married to or dating a woman? You seem to be very ignorant of women. — Lone Wolf

Apparently he is married >:O

As one saying goes, men are stupid and women are crazy. But women are mostly crazy because men are stupid. :P

>:O

Look, if I make $30K a year and you make $80K a year, we're pretty much both equal financially. Nothing big. You wouldn't be a big moneymaker for making $80K while I make $30K. That's pennies. If someone is making $350K a year however, now we're talking about someone starting to become a big boy. Until you're making that much, you're pretty much a nothing financially. When I see people very proud that they're making $80K a year, I always laugh at them. They don't realise that that's pennies in reality. So it's good to know where you objectively stand. You don't say you're a great leader because you run a fucking unit in a hospital. That's BS, but of course people like to feel great about themselves instead of accept the reality of their situation. — Agustino

So, leadership is measured by how much money you make? I don't understand what you're trying to say.

So we aren't talking about leaders, we're talking about great leaders. What percent of people would you say are great leaders. I'd say much less than 1 percent. You are concluding that women should be submissive to men because of the performance of less than 1 percent of the population.

So, leadership is measured by how much money you make? I don't understand what you're trying to say. — T Clark

Nope, that was an analogy. Now I'm starting to doubt your intelligence too. Just like you wouldn't claim someone making 80K/year is a big boy or better (financially speaking) than someone making 30K/year, so too you wouldn't claim someone being in charge of a unit at a hospital is a great leader compared to someone who just leads their dog. Get it? They're both insignificant in their respective field (finance and leadership).

What percent of people would you say are great leaders. I'd say much less than 1 percent. You are concluding that women should be submissive to men because of the performance of less than 1 percent of the population. — T Clark

Well yes, a very tiny percentage. And no, I didn't say women should be submissive to men because of that.

I never said that all women are mostly gentle, if you finish reading the sentence — Lone Wolf

Here's what you wrote:

Just do not assume that because one has seen from experiences that most women are mostly gentle that they all are — Lone Wolf

How is that inconsistent with the quote I used. I didn't say you said all women are mostly gentle.

As one saying goes, men are stupid and women are crazy. But women are mostly crazy because men are stupid — Lone Wolf

I love this statement.

Now I'm starting to doubt your intelligence too. ) — Agustino

Again, insults instead of substantive argument.

Just like you wouldn't claim someone making 80K/year is a big boy or better (financially speaking) than someone making 30K/year, so too you wouldn't claim someone being in charge of a unit at a hospital is a great leader compared to someone who just leads their dog. Get it? They're both insignificant in their respective field (finance and leadership). — Agustino

I know you'll just use this as another opportunity to call me stupid, but I don't get what you're trying to say.

Well yes, a very tiny percentage. And no, I didn't say women should be submissive to men because of that. — Agustino

Here's what you said in your first post on this thread:

Women should be more submissive to men intellectually than they currently are, on average, as men seem to make better decision makers. Why? Because men can be ruthless, aggressive and competitive much more frequently than women, traits which are required for making great decisions in the world. This largely has to do with biological makeup (testosterone). — Agustino

You say that women should be submissive because only men can make great decisions. Am I wrong in assuming that, in you opinion, great decisions are made by great men?

You say that women should be submissive because only men can make great decisions. Am I wrong in assuming that, in you opinion, great decisions are made by great men? — T Clark

Yes you are absolutely wrong. I said that because of certain natural advantages, men generally make better leaders than women. This is seen very clearly at the top of the leadership chain - at the very highest levels we see a complete dominance of men over women (Presidents, Generals, CEOs, etc.). At lower levels of leadership things are still in the favour of men, but obviously much less so, because training can overcome natural disadvantages (like lower testosterone levels). Obviously at the highest level the natural advantages do play a larger role than training, cause at such levels of performance, both the men and the women are, roughly, equally trained.

Ha.

So, leadership is measured by how much money you make? I don't understand what you're trying to say.

So we aren't talking about leaders, we're talking about great leaders. What percent of people would you say are great leaders. — T Clark

The Humphrey Institute at the U of MN used to have a graduate department called "Reflective Leadership". I worked two years there as a clerk. I never did get a good explanation as to what "reflective leadership" was supposed to be.

They did, however, talk about different types and styles of leadership. In 40 years of working, I met two excellent leaders: one specialized in developing (1970s) educational technology. He led by coaching faculty to try new approaches and displaying unbounded enthusiasm. Some of it worked, some of it didn't.

The other great leader oversaw AIDS education by a non-profit. She led by quiet suggestion, long leashes, and technical and professional quality (she was an MPH).

Some leaders who were not so good:

Some bad leaders generally insist on extremely tight control of professional staff who presumably have the skills and training to work much more independently.

Some leaders are really great starters but are bad at on-going management (like the head of the AIDS non-profit). Other leaders head off innovation but are good at keeping things running for years on end.

Great leaders can both tolerate innovation and manage the long run.

<1% for great leaders; maybe 2% or 3% for very good leaders; 50% for adequate leaders and 25% for tolerably, but poor leaders, and 21% for leaders who end up destroying organizational resources.

Well that's certainly my reaction when I hear you like being dominated sexually and you list as your favorite philosophers a whole bunch of theists like Augustine, Kierkegaard, Aquinas etc. You know, that sounds quite wild for your heroes I think ;)

I never said that all women are mostly gentle, if you finish reading the sentence — Lone Wolf
Here's what you wrote:
Just do not assume that because one has seen from experiences that most women are mostly gentle that they all are — Lone Wolf
How is that inconsistent with the quote I used. I didn't say you said all women are mostly gentle. — T Clark

Here, let me try to clarify my point. If one male had experiences with women who are mostly gentle, then in his mind a stereotype may have formed that all women must be gentle. It is not true, hence my statement that it is incorrect to assume such a thing. If I may offer yet another example, many assume that because of my smaller being that I am incapable of doing activities such as combat fighting and flying an aircraft. I do those things, so I know as fact that there are other women who also do these things and are not mostly gentle.

Great leaders can both tolerate innovation and manage the long run.

<1% for great leaders; maybe 2% or 3% for very good leaders; 50% for adequate leaders and 25% for tolerably, but poor leaders, and 21% for leaders who end up destroying organizational resources. — Bitter Crank

I think this is a very fine assessment – probably true to a large degree. It has great import for us all to contemplate. Imagine if we could increase the great leadership by a healthy percentage. If we studied and applied great leadership styles in MBA programs – would it have a significant effect? I think it would. The feminine intellect is well suited to lead “by quiet suggestion, long leashes, and technical and professional quality”. I wish we, as a society, could see the values inherent in the feminine intellect.

I too am a theist. You think I'd give it away for free? Marriage is a wonderful institution.

Here, let me try to clarify my point. If one male had experiences with women who are mostly gentle, then in his mind a stereotype may have formed that all women must be gentle. It is not true, hence my statement that it is incorrect to assume such a thing. If I may offer yet another example, many assume that because of my smaller being that I am incapable of doing activities such as combat fighting and flying an aircraft. I do those things, so I know as fact that there are other women who also do these things and are not mostly gentle. — Lone Wolf

My hat is off to you!

You say that women should be submissive because only men can make great decisions. Am I wrong in assuming that, in you opinion, great decisions are made by great men? — T Clark

Yes you are absolutely wrong. — Agustino

Here is another quote from earlier in this thread:

No, but only they [men] are GREAT leaders. Everyone else doesn't really count, they're virtually nothing in terms of leadership — Agustino

Marriage is a wonderful institution. — River

I agree.

You think I'd give it away for free? — River

Well, how am I supposed to know that? You said you liked being dominated by men sexually, so what is one to assume if you say that? :P You know, "I like X" is different from "I would like X" :P