₦airaland Forum

ibkayee:
1.
It's just an example
The study is more speculation based on indicative patterns, doesn't claim to be the ultimate/absolute truth
I'm not making absolute conclusions either
One of the studies collected data spanning 20 years


2.
We're saying the same thing. Both can lose interest, yes, but females are 'socialised/groomed' away from it more then men

3.
They can both 'succeed' together and at the same time I'm saying that given equal footing, women wouldn't be as behind. I'm not not saying women would've knocked men out of their spots or men only reached the top because women aren't as motivated,

yes I know, I said some not all

So in essence, you agree with me that although woman might have been discouraged in the past, there is nothing to suggest that those very intelligent men who are the top of the food chain will have been displaced anyway if the reverse have been the case for women

Cause you are twisting my very small brain now

sunshineG:
yes I know, I said some not all

So in essence, you agree with me that although woman might have been discouraged in the past, there is nothing to suggest that those very intelligent men who are the top of the food chain will have been displaced anyway if the reverse have been the case for women

Cause you are twisting my very small brain now

Not saying they would be displaced or undermining their achievements

There's a difference between women displacing them (not what I'm saying) and women being in similar positions more equally

ibkayee:
Not saying they would be displaced or undermining their achievements

There's a difference between women displacing them (not what I'm saying) and women being in similar positions more equally

OK but it is almost the same thing

But because we are from the same place, I will agree with you

So don't mind me asking this question that is bigger than my mouth

Are you studying in London ?

sunshineG:
OK but it is almost the same thing

But because we are from the same place, I will agree with you

So don't mind me asking this question that is bigger than my mouth

Are you studying in London ?

It's not sha but nevermind, I think we actually agree on most things though

I've finished studying

You're a student?

ibkayee:
It's not sha but nevermind, I think we actually agree on most things though

I've finished studying

You're a student?

no I am not
I finished studying some three years ago
But currently trying to further my studies sha

So you are bawling hard now

sunshineG:
no I am not
I finished studying some three years ago
But currently trying to further my studies sha

So you are bawling hard now

Wish you the best with furthering

Lol I'm doing ok haha

ibkayee:
Wish you the best with furthering

Lol I'm doing ok haha

abi that is the most important thing jare

See you around

sunshineG:
abi that is the most important thing jare

See you around

I like you sha

See you around

sunshineG:
So many question and very odd examples

1) No I am not saying women are necessarily absent in most position that requires mental prowess but you just need to take a good look at number of lectures in universities or in any other positions that requires some sort of cognitive capacity and see that men outnumber women in numbers

And why do you think they are absent? Because men are more cognitive than women?

2) This is the 21century bro not 15th century. Why should anyone have excuse of not pursuing a career. Take madam ngozi ewala for example, should she have not pursue her career to the highest level because no woman have ever become finance minister of Nigeria before her. If stereotypes really exsist in such career like you have stated should fear be the way to break it
After all not all men in a certain careers will also end up at the very top of that carrer, should that be a reason to avoid such professions.

Are you saying stereotypes do not exist? Where have i stated fear was the cause?

3)I think you are now making this argument some sorts of gender equality isssue using the female CIA director analogy
just because a female was responsible in capturing bin laden does not mean a female should be the head of the organisation. This does not mean female agents are clever or out number their male counterpart in anyway. So the fact that no female has headed the organization may just be because no female agent deserves it yet

Can you see what you did there? Just because a female was responsible for the capture? Just? Do you know how many resources both human and material was expended to catch him? You just trivialized one of the greatest military achievement that cost billions and human lives.The lady who did was a child when her parents died in WTC. Ca you also see what you did there? "may just be no female agent deserves it? Which means you are speculating but you don't know for a fact, which means you are just speculating and there could be a woman who truly qualifies for the post, perhaps the Deputy Director recently appointed.

However, why I raised that point wasn't because of a woman should be a CIA director but the emphasis on social considerations/motivation being more of an influence than cognitive capabilities. That was my point. I am sure if they were looking for a woman who was fit to be a cia director they would find one. Just as the one who caught Osama was more important than her sex. Be honest, did you even know a woman was responsible?

[quore] 4) The queen of England issue is not about intellectual capacity but cultural and family issue, it is not a career part and the selection process is subjective as it is only between the royal family(not open to the public). This does mean she got the job through her intellectual prowess.[/quote]Which is my point hence why i said her blood was the qualifier. Something that did not have anything to do with intellectual capacity but blood, a woman was almost sidelined and relegated. They did not even want to kneel before her at her coronation, please tell me why?

5) Clinton did not loose because she was a woman, she lost the election because unlike trump she failed to connect with the Rustbelt states voters(she didn't have a program for them). I think I watched a documentary on that yesterday. In fact if any thing Clinton won the popular votes but lost the Rustbelt votes. So that analogy is faulty.

Forgive me, i didn't know much about US politics.I know i heard something about electoral collages being the ultimate deciding factor. This i know, but i am saying if she were a man do you think she would not have won? Bush didn't even vote for Trump, many heavy weights were against Trump, Warren Buffet the sage was, but Trump managed to win. Let's look at it now, Trump who says he will repeal healthcare, build a wall and some other ludicrous policies even international leaders decried his success was chosen over a woman with experience, and you think it is because he had a plan for whatever belt? You genuinely think that was the case? What out of all those promises has he fulfilled? Except you think the whatever belt states are retarded not to know a con when they see one.


I see your Ibadan school has graduated to Corona.[/quote]

ibkayee:
Lol no not really, no serious research would make such an absolute claim without accounting for all additional factors, and then dismissing socialisation to top it off. You didn’t ‘not complicate’ anything, you just approached it with a very simple way of thinking and not in the good way

Funny enough, the initial topic was about emotional intelligence, bringing up profession was a bit off topic

I quoted based on your emphasis on the word rational
If you want to debate with a lady, you keep it as simple as possible to allow drifting, that's why I hinged the argument on the major point, because all other points will only point to why men dominate logic based profession.

Gwaihir:
And why do you think they are absent? Because men are more cognitive than women?



Are you saying stereotypes do not exist? Where have i stated fear was the cause?



Can you see what you did there? Just because a female was responsible for the capture? Just? Do you know how many resources both human and material was expended to catch him? You just trivialized one of the greatest military achievement that cost billions and human lives.The lady who did was a child when her parents died in WTC. Ca you also see what you did there? "may just be no female agent deserves it? Which means you are speculating but you don't know for a fact, which means you are just speculating and there could be a woman who truly qualifies for the post, perhaps the Deputy Director recently appointed.

However, why I raised that point wasn't because of a woman should be a CIA director but the emphasis on social considerations/motivation being more of an influence than cognitive capabilities. That was my point. I am sure if they were looking for a woman who was fit to be a cia director they would find one. Just as the one who caught Osama was more important than her sex. Be honest, did you even know a woman was responsible?

[quore] 4) The queen of England issue is not about intellectual capacity but cultural and family issue, it is not a career part and the selection process is subjective as it is only between the royal family(not open to the public). This does mean she got the job through her intellectual prowess.

Which is my point hence why i said her blood was the qualifier. Something that did not have anything to do with intellectual capacity but blood, a woman was almost sidelined and relegated. They did not even want to kneel before her at her coronation, please tell me why?

5) Clinton did not loose because she was a woman, she lost the election because unlike trump she failed to connect with the Rustbelt states voters(she didn't have a program for them). I think I watched a documentary on that yesterday. In fact if any thing Clinton won the popular votes but lost the Rustbelt votes. So that analogy is faulty.

Forgive me, i didn't know much about US politics.I know i heard something about electoral collages being the ultimate deciding factor. This i know, but i am saying if she were a man do you think she would not have won? Bush didn't even vote for Trump, many heavy weights were against Trump, Warren Buffet the sage was, but Trump managed to win. Let's look at it now, Trump who says he will repeal healthcare, build a wall and some other ludicrous policies even international leaders decried his success was chosen over a woman with experience, and you think it is because he had a plan for whatever belt? You genuinely think that was the case? What out of all those promises has he fulfilled? Except you think the whatever belt states are retarded not to know a con when they see one.


I see your Ibadan school has graduated to Corona.

now
1) I am not saying women are absent because of the cognitive capacity but there is no evidence to suggest that men will be out of that position if women were more motivated or that women will out number men. So we are both arguing based on speculations here so absolute conclusion cannot be drawn. That has been the basis of my arguments

2)You stated in you previous post why stereotypes may force women not to try a profession because there is no guarantee they will get to the top. Hence, fear of the Unkown is what is keeping them away from such profession. So I said fear alone shouldnt be a factor that demotivates them, because serotypes have always existed ( even for people of color like me and you) but will that discouraged you ? I doubt it. So why women?

3)To be honest you will be the first person to tell me a female was responsible for the capture of bin laden, but to frank it doesn't still mean she is smartest officer available, but maybe she is the best for such operations, I can't say
However, the running of CIA is more than the capture of bin laden as it deals with the operations of america world wide. Hence, just like you based your argument speculations, I still believe maybe they havent find a famale worth that position yet. After all , we have female in some top security positions in america in the past
Forexample, code Lisa rice was sectary of state under bush , and Clinton was sectary of state under obama

4) It is your opinion that trump is a scam, a lot of americans dont feel that wat and they made him president. Acctually, the documentary on CNN showed how happy a family of 5 in the Rustbelt are with their decision, as they claim trump was keeping to his words of bringing job back to america

Trump won the rustbelt cause he promised jobs, he promised to pull out of the climate agreement (which he already did) to save coal miners in the Rustbelt
Clinton lost because they felt she had no plan for them period

Please what is wrong with ibadan school jare

ibkayee:
I cited 1919 because it’s an example of not being allowed at all rather than just being restricted

Laws like 1919 were more or less just formal agreements and didn’t necesarily mean a change in attitude, sexism was still carried through ‘generations’ despite being passed ‘since’

Women suffer more discrimination in hiring for jobs in mathematics

https://www.usnews.com/news/stem-solutions/articles/2014/03/26/study-women-heavily-discriminated-against-in-math-hiring

Dr. Vera Rubin rejected by Princeton for a graduate degree because their astronomy program didn't accept women. (Occurred in 1948, policy held until 1975)

‘Aspiring female lawyers faced a difficult educational and professional road. Women seeking to become lawyers were discouraged from doing so. They were explicitly or implicitly told that they would be outnumbered by men, that it would be nearly impossible to get a job in a firm, and, through the use of gendered pronouns and anecdotes, that law was a man's profession. Women lawyers were encouraged to stick to areas considered "well-suited" to them such as legal aid and government work, and they made only 60 percent of their male colleagues' salaries.’

https://www.law.georgetown.edu/library/collections/gender-legal-history/glh-summary.cfm?glhID=CD09BC44-EB0E-9C6D-4D45D050CEF41DC4

‘Aspiring female lawyers faced a difficult educational and professional road. Women seeking to become lawyers were discouraged from doing so. They were explicitly or implicitly told that they would be outnumbered by men, that it would be nearly impossible to get a job in a firm, and, through the use of gendered pronouns and anecdotes, that law was a man's profession. Women lawyers were encouraged to stick to areas considered "well-suited" to them such as legal aid and government work, and they made only 60 percent of their male colleagues' salaries.’

https://www.law.georgetown.edu/library/collections/gender-legal-history/glh-summary.cfm?glhID=CD09BC44-EB0E-9C6D-4D45D050CEF41DC4


There's quite a bit of research on it sha but ok lol

My analogy was based on my point that men and women are disproportionately represented in these fields partly because men have had a history of being socialised towards them more.

Overwhelming evidence indicates that women are socialized away from STEM (Johnson, 2007; Sadker & Sadker, 1994; Hall & Sandler, 1982).

https://www.law.georgetown.edu/library/collections/gender-legal-history/glh-summary.cfm?glhID=CD09BC44-EB0E-9C6D-4D45D050CEF41DC4

We’ll agree to disagree I guess.

You insinuated it was solely initially (main reason I disagreed with you), now it’s major.

Eh, I maintain my stance on male/female disparities in these professions not being primarily down to innate ability, there are too many confounding variables to put it down to one thing

It’s also an oversimplification to look at the differences in male/female behaviour and not take social conditioning in consideration at all, so we’ll just agree to disagree lol

Didn’t really get your last line.


Grasped the analogy, but I was focusing solely on the impact things had, you were talking about strides taken after the fact.

It only makes sense that in the years coming the gap will get smaller since we currently have the opportunities many didn’t have in the past, though it's not necessarily that we got smarter or anything, just more opportunities.


Lol a bit utopic, even as ethnic minorities, realistically we aren’t always on equal footing with others but ok .


Did you manage to find the part where I got emotional, drifted etc?

I cited 1919 because it’s an example of not being allowed at all rather than just being restricted

Laws like 1919 were more or less just formal agreements and didn’t necesarily mean a change in attitude, sexism was still carried through ‘generations’ despite being passed ‘since’...
Law is one of the professions that is ever changing and evolving, asides I am wondering how an action that occurred in 1919 can be remotely linked to what is happening in 21st century, this ain't history woman.

Women suffer more discrimination in hiring for jobs in mathematics
Nobody denies talent if it's staring in their faces, there are several records to prove this. If they ain't exceptional, they go where they fit


Dr. Vera Rubin rejected by Princeton for a graduate degree because their astronomy program didn't accept women. (Occurred in 1948, policy held until 1975)
Are we talking ASTRONOMY here?

Aspiring female lawyers faced a difficult educational and professional road. Women seeking to become lawyers were discouraged from doing so. They were explicitly or implicitly told that they would be outnumbered by men, that it would be nearly impossible to get a job in a firm, and...

With the considerable amount of female lawyers, that we have today, I don't get this point


You insinuated it was solely initially (main reason I disagreed with you), now it’s major.
How did I insinuate this, when I emphasized on the word 'sampling' emotion or logic here?

Eh, I maintain my stance on male/female disparities in these professions not being primarily down to innate ability, there are too many confounding variables to put it down to one thing
The number of variables will still converge to one factor, which is what I'm focussing on.

Grasped the analogy, but I was focusing solely on the impact things had, you were talking about strides taken after the fact.

It only makes sense that in the years coming the gap will get smaller since we currently have the opportunities many didn’t have in the past, though it's not necessarily that we got smarter or anything, just more opportunities.
This is the type of reply I was expecting: today the ratio of male to female in tech is 7:3 (just an analogy), so also is the ratio of major impacts made by both gender. However, we all know this is not the case.


Lol a bit utopic, even as ethnic minorities, realistically we aren’t always on equal footing with others but ok .
Then what's your point again

Did you manage to find the part where I got emotional, drifted etc?
If I had quoted those references, we will end up derailing the major subject.

ToyinDipo:
I quoted based on your emphasis on the word rational
If you want to debate with a lady, you keep it as simple as possible to allow drifting, that's why I hinged the argument on the major point, because all other points will only point to why men dominate logic based profession.

Lol right.

Seems like you just got a bit triggered by the word then went on a random ego driven tangent. Lol typical. Like, wetin consine violence with profession?

Lol but I emphasised it only in the context of emotional intelligence, did you not see all the other words floating around it in the paragraph?

Even another poster pointed out the drift and was confused

Are you going to show me where I dirfted mate I've been asking since the dawn of this discussion because these side comments you keep making only work if it's true

ibkayee:
Lol right.

Seems like you just got a bit triggered by the word then went on a random ego driven tangent. Lol typical. Like, wetin consine violence with profession?

Lol but I emphasised it only in the context of emotional intelligence, did you not see all the other words floating around it in the paragraph?

Even another poster pointed out the drift and was confused

Are you going to show me where I dirfted mate I've been asking since the dawn of this discussion because these side comments you keep making only work if it's true

First off, refer to my last post that was initially hidden by spambot
Yea, I went on an ego driven tangent to put you into perspective .... if x is an element of y, if I can prove the validity of y, then I have proven the validity of x. I hope you can grab that, lol... talking about context.

Sierusvirus:
My rules states, what I know you won't like me do to you, pls don't do it to me, the principal guiding me.
She should learn how to control her anger because that's what's meant to be. If everybody starts showcasing their anger with the current Nigeria condition, none will survive.
I am down to earth and respect people that respects me too.
Let's just see it this way, she was the one that bought the car or built the house and the guy destroys it, how would she feel. Everybody will definitely support her and crucify the guy by saying all sorts of thing like irresponsible man.
Girls do that because they don't invest in any relationship, check very well if a girl does invest, she will never destroy anything. I strongly believe in maturity.
I will never lay my hands on a girl but let her not lay hers on my body cos she will surely reap it back immediately.

Well, Good points you raised. Yes, i agree a woman should not raise her hands on you. That is not my point, i am talking about material stuff like car that was destroyed and you are talking about baseball bat to her ribs. If for example you are married to my sister and she slaps your mother (i don't care what her reasons are) and you slap her x2 back and she packs out into my house and reports to me, i will tell her you are nice that if it was me i will slap her x4 and i will send her packing from my house as well. I hope you get my drift now.

sunshineG:
now
1) I am not saying women are absent because of the cognitive capacity but there is no evidence to suggest that men will be out of that position if women were more motivated or that women will out number men. So we are both arguing based on speculations here so absolute conclusion cannot be drawn. That has been the basis of my arguments

You are confusing yourself, you said I should take a look at classes that more cognitive and see how men outnumber women , I then asked you why? Also the way you phrased that sentence suggests that you don't expect to find women in more cognitive classes. the emboldened is all that mattered.

You stated in you previous post why stereotypes may force women not to try a profession because there is no guarantee they will get to the top. Hence, fear of the Unkown is what is keeping them away from such profession. So I said fear alone shouldnt be a factor that demotivates them, because serotypes have always existed ( even for people of color like me and you) but will that discouraged you ? I doubt it. So why women?

I did not state stereotypes, I asked you a question at which you claimed stereotypes as your answer. Now I am asking you if it were stereotypes, isn't that social conditioning on the women even as from childhood?

You mention fear, I did not say or hint on fear that you think fear is the reason is you do not quite see things from their POV. Take Iweala you used as an example, she left the shores of this country during the Biafra war, hence she got to study abroad in a society that encourages female education and her father was a Brigadier general at the time. Can you see how social factors influenced her and fear couldn't have stunted her zeal or determination?

Now, let me present a true life case to you. An ex of mine was to go for medicine, she did not have the brains and she knew and did not want it, but her mum said not to worry that she has spoken to the VC that she would make the list. Eventually her mum heeded to her pleas that she has no interest in it. There is a choir girl in my church who was no doubt a very intelligent girl. she wanted to study medicine but her mum couldn't fund it because her parents were second separated. Her mum asked her father and the father said, she is a girl why should he have to spend so much money on a girl who is going yo end up marrying someone else?

you see while we say women have nothing stopping them, they have social conditions and expectations placed on them that would impede their dreams in certain careers they have interest that would need more commitment from them from a woman who will be a mother and a present mother not an absent one. These things further complicates things for them. If you check very well, women who have excelled at careers were raised by single mothers, all girls family, born in western society where the parents are quite liberal and of course had the backing of certain men usually their fathers to secure what is rightfully theirs, the latter particularly applies to Nigeria. If you even check the successful women, most are of single mothers, divorced or husband who are ready to play the home front while the wife is away for a period of time, this however doesn't make the husband less successful but you and I know that is not given to most men to stand a wife of such, is it?

These are the various social expectations that they have stacked against them. I am not pro-femimism because I don't trust the ideology especially those who push it. But you and I have to be honest, women do not have the equal footing and unburdened social expectations that men have, which puts men at an advantage. look at it, a man is expected to be the provider of the family, by social expectation, much is required of him career wise than a female.

3)To be honest you will be the first person to tell me a female was responsible for the capture of bin laden, but to frank it doesn't still mean she is smartest officer available, but maybe she is the best for such operations, I can't say
However, the running of CIA is more than the capture of bin laden as it deals with the operations of america world wide. Hence, just like you based your argument speculations, I still believe maybe they havent find a famale worth that position yet. After all , we have female in some top security positions in america in the past
Forexample, code Lisa rice was sectary of state under bush , and Clinton was sectary of state under obama

Like I said, my case is not with a woman being CIA director but to draw your perspective which you have trivialized her achievement. My case is with how social motivation was the reason why she was chosen,her zeal, tenacity over cognitive capabilities. This is why I am of the opinion that social expectation and conditioning are more of a driver to the attainment of something than the capabilities. The lady was encouraged because they saw she was useful for their agenda hence the training and everything she was given to her disposal.

4) It is your opinion that trump is a scam, a lot of americans dont feel that wat and they made him president. Acctually, the documentary on CNN showed how happy a family of 5 in the Rustbelt are with their decision, as they claim trump was keeping to his words of bringing job back to america

Trump won the rustbelt cause he promised jobs, he promised to pull out of the climate agreement (which he already did) to save coal miners in the Rustbelt
Clinton lost because they felt she had no plan for them period

I am not interested in arguing the politics of america to you but the social considerations of the both parties if things were otherwise.

look at it, Trump is a three time divorcee, he talked about grabbing a woman by the pussy, he has never served in government, he was publicly shown to have derided his party for being dumb, his policies were not clear cut out but for sensationalism and appealing to prejudices in people.

Clinton is a woman who stood by her husband even after what her husband did, she has served in the government overtime and well seasoned, she even appealed more to the black voters and Hispanics than Trump did.

if Clinton were a white male and Trump were a woman, do you think Trump would have won? Be real now.

Please what is wrong with ibadan school jare

This your psyche tactic is not necessary with me.

Gwaihir:
You are confusing yourself, you said I should take a look at classes that more cognitive and see how men outnumber women , I then asked you why? Also the way you phrased that sentence suggests that you don't expect to find women in more cognitive classes. the emboldened is all that mattered.




I did not state stereotypes, I asked you a question at which you claimed stereotypes as your answer. Now I am asking you if it were stereotypes, isn't that social conditioning on the women even as from childhood?

You mention fear, I did not say or hint on fear that you think fear is the reason is you not quite seeing things from their POV. Take Iweala you used as an example, she left the shores of this country during the Biafra war, hence she got to study abroad in a society that encourages female education and her father was a Brigadier general at the time. Can you see how social factors influenced her and fear couldn't have stunted her zeal or determination?

Now, let me present a true life case to you. An ex of mine was to go for medicine, she did not have the brains and she knew and did not want it, but her mum said not to worry that she has spoken to the VC that she would make the list. Eventually her mum heeded to her pleas that she has no interest in it. There is a choir girl in my church who was no doubt a very intelligent girl. she wanted to study medicine but her mum couldn't fund it because her parents were second separated. Her mum asked her father and the father said, she is a girl why should he have to spend so much money on a girl who is going yo end up marrying someone else?

you see while we say women have nothing stopping them, they have social conditions and expectations placed on them that would impede their dreams in certain careers they have interest that would need more commitment from them from a woman who will be a mother and a present mother not an absent one. This things further complicates things for them. If you check very well, women who have excelled at careers were raised by single mothers, all girls family, born in western society where the parents are quite liberal and of course had the backing of certain men usually their fathers to secure what is rightfully theirs, the latter particularly applies to Nigeria. If you even check the successful women, most are of single mothers, divorced or husband who are ready to play the home front while the wife is away for a period of time, this however doesn't make the husband less successful but you and I know that is not given to most men to stand a wife of such, is it?

This are the various social expectations that they have stacked against them. I am not pro-femimism because I don't trust the ideology especially those who push it. But you and I have to be honest, women do not have the equal footing and unburdened social expectations that men have, which puts men at an advantage. look at it, a man is expected to be the provider of the family, by social expectation, much is required of him career wise than a female.



Like I said, my case is not with a woman being CIA director but to draw your perspective which you have trivialized her achievement. My case is with how social motivation was the reason why she was chosen,her zeal, tenacity over cognitive capabilities. This is why I am of the opinion that social expectation and conditioning are more of a driver to the attainment of something than the capabilities. The lady was encouraged because they saw she was useful for their agenda hence the training and everything she was given to her disposal.



I am not interested in arguing the politics of america to you but the social considerations of the both parties if things were otherwise.

look at it, Trump is a three time divorcee, he talked about grabbing a woman by the pussy, he has never served in government, he was publicly shown to have derided his party for being dumb, his policies were not clear cut out but for sensationalism and appealing to prejudices in people.

Clinton is a woman who stood by her husband even after what her husband did, she has served in the government overtime and well seasoned, she even appealed more to the black voters and Hispanics than Trump did.

if Clinton were a white male and Trump were a woman, do you think Trump would have won? Be real now.



This your psyche tactic is not necessary with me.

1) I have not confused my self, rather you have misunderstood my point from the onset. I stated clearly that man outnumber women in cognitive field as of today and I gave examples , because you ask for evidence in your first post. However, you asked a different question about my previous response in your next post, and my answers was clear and simple. I stated that there is no evidence to suggest that men will not be in certain positions even if women were motivated to compete with them. Hence we were both speculating on what may happen without any evidence

2) secondly yes stereotypes exist but it is meant to be challenged and broken. It is what humanity is all about.

You gave an example of a friend of yours who wanted to study medicine, who faced challenges and was later discouraged. Yet, For that simple isolated incidence you gave. I can give you series of incidence were some women had such opportuniteies but refuse to take them ,and for you information that type of incidence is not peculiar to the female gender alone, her issue is down to poverty which affects the ambition of both males and females alike. By the way if she is she truely intelligent as you claim, she will find a way to use her intelligence in the society. Good examples of people like these are bill gate and seun

You gave another example of ngozi, I will not argue about that with you, but you can research wura ola esan the first woman to be a senator in Nigeria and come back and tell me how social pressure or issue in Nigeria affected her


3) I am not against a woman heading the cia, actually it is none of my business neither do i dissmiss the achievement of the woman that enabled the CIA to catch bin ladden,
However, I was against putting the reasons why there is no female cia director down to gender bias, because that view is too simplistic. The issue of the lady who caught bin laden and CIA director is two different things. There are so many CIA operatives doing equally great things

4)I am not arguing about american politics either, you brought it up in your previous post to prove a point. So you brought up that discussion, not me

Oh really Clinton is a saint isnt she ?
Do you know how Clinton fought against fellow women during the time her husband was facing the sexual arrestment case.

Do you know about the Jennifer Lewinsky saga ?
Where bill Clinton was impehe ed only to be reinstated again in 24 hours?
Do you know the role hillary played in that saga ?

Did you know about the famous deleted mails that got her the nickname crock Hillary

Even puplic opinion in america showed both trump and Clinton were not trusted by the electorate. So they both have terrible character according to the electorate, I guess they choose the lesser of the two evil

Note: do not misinterprete my post to suggest women have not been wronged in our societies, My main bone of contention is that there is no prove to suggest they will have been equal or better than men, if they have been given the opportunities in the first place

And what makes you think I am trying anything on you ?

genghiskhan007:
All these qualities are found in a Lagos babe.......I've been there for 4 yrs...talkn from experience

so mean lagos babes na gboro babes?

Benita27:
All these guys bashing her. Do you know if she has invested much into the relationship to get cheated on as reward?. Clearly, a lady who has much to lose does this. I'd do same if have got much to lose, while I walk away if there's nothing to lose.

SENSE FALL ON U

Organs:
Well, Good points you raised. Yes, i agree a woman should not raise her hands on you. That is not my point, i am talking about material stuff like car that was destroyed and you are talking about baseball bat to her ribs. If for example you are married to my sister and she slaps your mother (i don't care what her reasons are) and you slap her x2 back and she packs out into my house and reports to me, i will tell her you are nice that if it was me i will slap her x4 and i will send her packing from my house as well. I hope you get my drift now.

lol,
I do understanding u perfectly on that side but let's move to the material stuff and turn things around.
What do you think a lady would do to you if she bought all the property in her house with her hard earned money, you found out she was cheating, then you went to her house to express your angry by destroying all those property or car, what do you think she would do to you?
Shake hands with you or free you to destroy them and go like that?

Sierusvirus:
lol,
I do understanding u perfectly on that side but let's move to the material stuff and turn things around.
What do you think a lady would do to you if she bought all the property in her house with her hard earned money, you found out she was cheating, then you went to her house to express your angry by destroying all those property or car, what do you think she would do to you?
Shake hands with you or free you to destroy them and go like that?

Actually, most men will not go destroying stuff. Me i wont. Its a lady's thing. That is why women in the nigerian police do not carry gun for the most part. Also, most ladies, its "insult" "abuse" and nagging that is their weapon. Even if you destroy stuff, she will just be crying and begging. That one destroying vehicle, that guy don hurt am deep, deep. Also, babe wey dey "blow" you (BJ) make she come sabi say wetin she dey carry her mouth put, you come carry go shuk somewhere, ol boy, just go buy fire extinguisher....

Gwaihir:
You are confusing yourself, you said I should take a look at classes that more cognitive and see how men outnumber women , I then asked you why? Also the way you phrased that sentence suggests that you don't expect to find women in more cognitive classes. the emboldened is all that mattered.




I did not state stereotypes, I asked you a question at which you claimed stereotypes as your answer. Now I am asking you if it were stereotypes, isn't that social conditioning on the women even as from childhood?

You mention fear, I did not say or hint on fear that you think fear is the reason is you do not quite see things from their POV. Take Iweala you used as an example, she left the shores of this country during the Biafra war, hence she got to study abroad in a society that encourages female education and her father was a Brigadier general at the time. Can you see how social factors influenced her and fear couldn't have stunted her zeal or determination?

Now, let me present a true life case to you. An ex of mine was to go for medicine, she did not have the brains and she knew and did not want it, but her mum said not to worry that she has spoken to the VC that she would make the list. Eventually her mum heeded to her pleas that she has no interest in it. There is a choir girl in my church who was no doubt a very intelligent girl. she wanted to study medicine but her mum couldn't fund it because her parents were second separated. Her mum asked her father and the father said, she is a girl why should he have to spend so much money on a girl who is going yo end up marrying someone else?

you see while we say women have nothing stopping them, they have social conditions and expectations placed on them that would impede their dreams in certain careers they have interest that would need more commitment from them from a woman who will be a mother and a present mother not an absent one. These things further complicates things for them. If you check very well, women who have excelled at careers were raised by single mothers, all girls family, born in western society where the parents are quite liberal and of course had the backing of certain men usually their fathers to secure what is rightfully theirs, the latter particularly applies to Nigeria. If you even check the successful women, most are of single mothers, divorced or husband who are ready to play the home front while the wife is away for a period of time, this however doesn't make the husband less successful but you and I know that is not given to most men to stand a wife of such, is it?

These are the various social expectations that they have stacked against them. I am not pro-femimism because I don't trust the ideology especially those who push it. But you and I have to be honest, women do not have the equal footing and unburdened social expectations that men have, which puts men at an advantage. look at it, a man is expected to be the provider of the family, by social expectation, much is required of him career wise than a female.



Like I said, my case is not with a woman being CIA director but to draw your perspective which you have trivialized her achievement. My case is with how social motivation was the reason why she was chosen,her zeal, tenacity over cognitive capabilities. This is why I am of the opinion that social expectation and conditioning are more of a driver to the attainment of something than the capabilities. The lady was encouraged because they saw she was useful for their agenda hence the training and everything she was given to her disposal.



I am not interested in arguing the politics of america to you but the social considerations of the both parties if things were otherwise.

look at it, Trump is a three time divorcee, he talked about grabbing a woman by the pussy, he has never served in government, he was publicly shown to have derided his party for being dumb, his policies were not clear cut out but for sensationalism and appealing to prejudices in people.

Clinton is a woman who stood by her husband even after what her husband did, she has served in the government overtime and well seasoned, she even appealed more to the black voters and Hispanics than Trump did.

if Clinton were a white male and Trump were a woman, do you think Trump would have won? Be real now.



This your psyche tactic is not necessary with me.

I'm not going to argue this men or women thing with you because I strongly believe that men are more rational and women are more emotional. Social conditioning you say? So here's just one question for you how far back has this social conditioning been affecting females? Give a date and specific society if any and if it has stopped affecting indicate when, if it has reduced significantly indicate as well. if it hasn't stopped or reduced you can say so.

Now, in this society whether it's social conditioning OR not what we have is a superior male gender rationally to the female gender. Now let me point out huge errors in your points

1 American elections : you clearly stated that you don't know much about American politics so why did you bring it up. You can't argue what you dont know much about and not make errors. Like the fact that Americans voted for Trump and not Hillary because he was a man. This is utter rubbish. Let me tell you why she didn't a) her service as the secretary of sTate was full of scandals from Benghazi to emails to corruption in her Democratic Party. She had one of the most catastrophic tenures as secretary of state as stated by two former secretaries. She lied several times under oath etc. Trump won because Clinton was perceived as a worse candidate. Even the Obama administration has poor approval ratings and she was part of it.

2 women are being encouraged but men do more work and do it better

thesuave10:
I'm not going to argue this men or women thing with you because I strongly believe that men are more rational and women are more emotional. Social conditioning you say? So here's just one question for you how far back has this social conditioning been affecting females? Give a date and specific society if any and if it has stopped affecting indicate when, if it has reduced significantly indicate as well. if it hasn't stopped or reduced you can say so.

Now, in this society whether it's social conditioning OR not what we have is a superior male gender rationally to the female gender. Now let me point out huge errors in your points

1 American elections : you clearly stated that you don't know much about American politics so why did you bring it up. You can't argue what you dont know much about and not make errors. Like the fact that Americans voted for Trump and not Hillary because he was a man. This is utter rubbish. Let me tell you why she didn't a) her service as the secretary of sTate was full of scandals from Benghazi to emails to corruption in her Democratic Party. She had one of the most catastrophic tenures as secretary of state as stated by two former secretaries. She lied several times under oath etc. Trump won because Clinton was perceived as a worse candidate. Even the Obama administration has poor approval ratings and she was part of it.

2 women are being encouraged but men do more work and do it better

By the emboldened, it is futile to argue with you. I expect you are 'rational' enough to understand why.

Talking of Clinton like the Bush family do not have dirty records from the senior to the junior and the atrocities they committed over the middle east. Yet both son and father served 16 years combined, even Jeb is a governor.

Abeg, don't have time for epistles.

Gwaihir:
By the emboldened, it is futile to argue with you. I expect you are 'rational' enough to understand why.

Talking of Clinton like the Bush family do not have dirty records from the senior to the junior and the atrocities they committed over the middle east. Yet both son and father served 16 years combined, even Jeb is a governor.

Abeg, don't have time for epistles.

Since you can't answer the question you just made the wrong decision like you did with the American issue and talk about something you don't know anything about. Hers were way worse. The FBI investigated her. She lied to the American people and the American Congress. Young man hers were far worse. You don't know anything about bush or American politics.
Your arguments have been far from rational because you have a serious lack of information and knowledge on what you were arguing about. I only came to correct you. As for the question I'm sure you can never answer it.

thesuave10:
Since you can't answer the question you just made the wrong decision like you did with the American issue and talk about something you don't know anything about. Hers were way worse. The FBI investigated her. She lied to the American people and the American Congress. Young man hers were far worse. You don't know anything about bush or American politics.
Your arguments have been far from rational because you have a serious lack of information and knowledge on what you were arguing about. I only came to correct you. As for the question I'm sure you can never answer it.

Dude why is your blood growing hot? When she asked you for stats did you provide? I mentioned how social expectations of women stunts their career dreams. You refused to speak on that but went to go pick on something that is not part of my argument.

I said on social context, all things being equal, if a woman had deride her party, called them dumb, made prejudicial comments and talked about men genitals, let's say for example, being small and then you had a male who was of the Clinton profile and her shenanigans as no politician doesn't have., would Trump as a female had won? It's bloody common.sense am.not talking about the intricacies of American politics. Is that too hard for you to grab? Me saying I don't know was referring to the way their election works not the things he referenced that are well known.

The fact you can't give a yes or no answer says alot.

You are so rational you picked something I am not that versed in to argue with which wasn't the basis of my argument to begin with but chickened out when she asked you to provide links to buttress your claim but still hold belief that men are more rational than women?

Gwaihir:
Dude why is your blood growing hot? When she asked you for stats did you provide? I mentioned how social expectations of women stunts their career dreams. You refused to speak on that but went to go pick on something that is not part of my argument.

I said on social context, all things being equal, if a woman had deride her party, called them dumb, made prejudicial comments and talked about men genitals, let's say for example, being small and then you had a male who was of the Clinton profile and her shenanigans as no politician doesn't have., would Trump as a female had won? It's bloody common.sense am.not talking about the intricacies of American politics. Is that too hard for you to grab? Me saying I don't know was referring to the way their election works not the things he referenced that are well known.

The fact you can't give a yes or no answer says alot.

You are so rational you picked something I am not that versed in to argue with which wasn't the basis of my argument to begin with but chickened out when she asked you to provide links to buttress your claim but still hold belief that men are more rational than women?

Trust me my blood I just about chill. When your points don't support that is by definition irrational. It doesn't get worse than that. So if you want to argue bring out true points that reflect your argument. They should be true and logical at the same time. Your facts are false.

Now you have made another fallacious argument. A very common one that irrational people do. "if Trump was a woman". This is a fallacious argument. Your conclusion is that Clinton lost because she is a woman and then your premise to support the conclusion is "if Trump was a woman he would have lost " this is error in logic 101 .are you even listening to yourself.

My question was not about any statistics. I asked you for a date and I knew you would never answer it because you don't know. To know the answer to that question you must know your onions very well. If I say alcohol affects John. I should the period or time I could make this claim. If you say societal conditioning affects the female mind, you should know at least the period this took place and also tell me why the society suddenly started being biased towards women.
This is what is called rationality. So I'm simple terms I hope you can comprehend. What's the Genesis of the social conditioning?

thesuave10:
Trust me my blood I just about chill. When your points don't support that is by definition irrational. It doesn't get worse than that. So if you want to argue bring out true points that reflect your argument. They should be true and logical at the same time. Your facts are false.

Now you have made another fallacious argument. A very common one that irrational people do. "if Trump was a woman". This is a fallacious argument. Your conclusion is that Clinton lost because she is a woman and then your premise to support the conclusion is "if Trump was a woman he would have lost " this is error in logic 101 .are you even listening to yourself.

My question was not about any statistics. I asked you for a date and I knew you would never answer it because you don't know. To know the answer to that question you must know your onions very well. If I say alcohol affects John. I should the period or time I could make this claim. If you say societal conditioning affects the female mind, you should know at least the period this took place and also tell me why the society suddenly started being biased towards women.
This is what is called rationality. So I'm simple terms I hope you can comprehend. What's the Genesis of the social conditioning?

You are too egoistic, unenlightened and narrow minded to get my drift hence why you are being dismissive and casting shallow aspersions at a failed attempt in sounding intellectual. Dude is even asking me to post dates as to when women started childbirth and childcare? Or what other social expectations is there again.

Good bye.

Gwaihir:
You are too egoistic, unenlightened and narrow minded to get my drift hence why you are being dismissive and casting shallow aspersions at a failed attempt in sounding intellectual. Dude is even asking me to post dates as to when women started childbirth and childcare? Or what other social expectations is there again.

Good bye.

Childbirth Chai you're not ready for intelligence Cuz it's clear the words and logic were beyond your understanding that was why I said I wasn't going to argue with you anyways when you can answer the question, call me

ToyinDipo:
I cited 1919 because it’s an example of not being allowed at all rather than just being restricted

Laws like 1919 were more or less just formal agreements and didn’t necesarily mean a change in attitude, sexism was still carried through ‘generations’ despite being passed ‘since’...
Law is one of the professions that is ever changing and evolving, asides I am wondering how an action that occurred in 1919 can be remotely linked to what is happening in 21st century, this ain't history woman.

Things can progress and still be uneven

Supreme court judge admits ‘it could take 50 years to achieve gender equality in the judiciary’ as recent as 2015.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/sep/22/gender-equality-warning-uk-legal-profession-supreme-court-judge-jonathan-sumption

I hope you aren’t one of those people who thinks ‘changing and evolving’ means we’ve already attained peak equality, if so that’s very optimistic

Nobody denies talent if it's staring in their faces, there are several records to prove this. If they ain't exceptional, they go where they fit

Lol you’re not going to get every job you want and can’t always blame discrimination but if you think there isn't a possibility forsome type of discrimation in hiring it’s a utopic and naive way of thinking

Studies have also shown that that there is sometimes a systematic bias against women

A 2012 randomized, double-blind study gave science faculty at research-intensive universities the application materials of a fictitious student randomly assigned a male or female name, and found that both male and female faculty rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hirable than the woman with identical application materials.

http://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.abstract#aff-1

A 2014 study found that both men and women were twice as likely to hire a man for a job that required math where subjects were hired to perform an arithmetic task that and on average, both genders perform equally well.

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/12/4403.full

Are we talking ASTRONOMY here?

Astronomy is a branch of science (physics)

With the considerable amount of female lawyers, that we have today, I don't get this point

This is like a white person thinking black people’s success proves racism is over lol oh boy

How did I insinuate this, when I emphasized on the word 'sampling' emotion or logic here?

You're having a laugh right?

I’ve been saying men don’t dominate those positions just because of an innate ability, like that’s literally been my only point throughout this discussion…

That societal factors also helped with affording them those roles and I have specifically used the word solely in every post too, those are the only points i’ve made albeit citing references.

You’ve been responding like that was what you were arguing for, didn’t make any mention of not meaning solely and even asked for other factors besides innate ability

https://s3.postimg.org/t2x9ycrvn/image.png
https://s3.postimg.org/no53motw3/image.png
https://s4.postimg.org/nfm30snsd/image.png
https://s2.postimg.org/i4joxvxax/image.png

And you’re asking where you insinuated…ok this is where I take my exit sha lol

Did you manage to find the part where I got emotional, drifted etc? [/b]
If I had quoted those references, we will end up derailing the major subject.

P.s. Lol I’ll just take it that it doesn’t exist, doesn’t take much to summarise, one bullet point sef, there’s even another convo we were having in this thread you could’ve mentioned it in.

Unsurprisingly lazy/lousy cop out, don’t even worry again my brother lol

No hard feelings sha

ibkayee:
Things can progress and still be uneven

Supreme court judge admits ‘it could take 50 years to achieve gender equality in the judiciary’ as recent as 2015.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/sep/22/gender-equality-warning-uk-legal-profession-supreme-court-judge-jonathan-sumption

I hope you aren’t one of those people who thinks ‘changing and evolving’ means we’ve already attained peak equality, if so that’s very optimistic



Lol you’re not going to get every job you want and can’t always blame discrimination but if you think there isn't a possibility forsome type of discrimation in hiring it’s a utopic and naive way of thinking

Studies have also shown that that there is sometimes a systematic bias against women

A 2012 randomized, double-blind study gave science faculty at research-intensive universities the application materials of a fictitious student randomly assigned a male or female name, and found that both male and female faculty rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hirable than the woman with identical application materials.

http://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.abstract#aff-1

A 2014 study found that both men and women were twice as likely to hire a man for a job that required math where subjects were hired to perform an arithmetic task that and on average, both genders perform equally well.

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/12/4403.full


Astronomy is a branch of science (physics)


This is like a white person thinking black people’s success proves racism is over lol oh boy


You're having a laugh right?

I’ve been saying men don’t dominate those positions just because of an innate ability, like that’s literally been my only point throughout this discussion…

That societal factors also helped with affording them those roles and I have specifically used the word solely in every post too, those are the only points i’ve made albeit citing references.

You’ve been responding like that was what you were arguing for, didn’t make any mention of not meaning solely and even asked for other factors besides innate ability

https://s3.postimg.org/t2x9ycrvn/image.png
https://s3.postimg.org/no53motw3/image.png
https://s4.postimg.org/nfm30snsd/image.png
https://s2.postimg.org/i4joxvxax/image.png

And you’re asking where you insinuated…ok this is where I take my exit sha lol



P.s. Lol I’ll just take it that it doesn’t exist, doesn’t take much to summarise, one bullet point sef, there’s even another convo we were having in this thread you could’ve mentioned it in.

Unsurprisingly lazy/lousy cop out, don’t even worry again my brother lol

No hard feelings sha

Let's put a bookmark here, and continue from there next time, lol

ToyinDipo:
Let's put a bookmark here, and continue from there next time, lol

Lol