1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Breaking: You must be a woman to compete in Miss Universe

Discussion in 'Personal' started by Vince_Ulam, Mar 10, 2018.

  1. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    As per this thread's title I am clearly talking about entrants. To compete in Miss Universe competition you must be a woman. Excuse the stark emphases but these were obviously necessary.

    Ignoring your typo, females cannot develop into women if they do not interact with men, likewise with males and women.

    What are you going to do, ban beauty products and nice clothes for women?

    Where are you getting these peculiar ideas?
     
  2. Nanook_rubs_it

    Nanook_rubs_it Star commenter

    Maybe:

    Evolutionary theories tend to be controversial, but the latest explanation for the development of homosexuality also seems pretty illogical at first glance.

    According to a group of Italian researchers, the genes that make men gay evolved because they actually make their female relatives more fertile.


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2004/oct/13/highereducation.research
     
  3. chelsea2

    chelsea2 Star commenter

    :confused::confused::confused: Could you explain this, please?
     
  4. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    Certainly. Women & men, on average, have complementary psychological traits which have optimal expressions within Society. These expressions do not unfold of their own accord but develop in reaction to other people.
     
  5. TCSC47

    TCSC47 Star commenter

    Lol, Vince. Normally you make some very good points which I appreciate, but you are going gaga on this one in an attempt, as I see it, to simply have an argument.Well, your succeeding there as I keep biting.

    For the record, Beauty pageants are dreadful things and merely encourage the objectification of women. The mere fact that the likes of Donald Trump was so heavily involved with them speaks for itself.

    There is nothing wrong with appreciating body beautiful and acknowledging and enjoying the beauty of the other (or our own) gender. Indeed that is one of my beefs about beauty pageants in that they pervert our need for attractive qualities into a two dimensional barbie doll. So many young people find it hard to develop into the world of adults because of this very thing. Because they don't have the so-called qualities of the beauty queen so-called role models they struggle to make good with their own personal relationships. This has been said many many times before. We are cutting off our appreciation of what is real body (and mind) beautiful by these useless exhibitions of the body. This is why there is so much antagonism to beauty pageants.

    And don't say that wasn't what your posting was about. I don't care! It is what I am about.
     
  6. Nanook_rubs_it

    Nanook_rubs_it Star commenter

    Do you think these traits always 'unfold' the same way (ie are they innate) or are they dependent on external factors, such as the society the individuals 'react' in?
     
  7. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    Is this still going on?

    As I said way back... I figured it was a reference to Vince's other threads about safe spaces for women...

    Bizarre...
     
  8. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    But are you applying that to human transgenderism?
     
  9. Nanook_rubs_it

    Nanook_rubs_it Star commenter

    Just trying to understand what Vince is trying to argue with the idea that we aren't fully developed in our genders without interaction with the other.

    It's the old 'nurture vs nature' bet:

    [​IMG]
     
    TCSC47 likes this.
  10. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    A good film reference...
     
    Nanook_rubs_it likes this.
  11. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    As I said:
     
  12. Nanook_rubs_it

    Nanook_rubs_it Star commenter

    Yep - but that suggests that gender traits are a social construct, which you have previously vigorously denied. I was hoping you were able to clarify and resolve that apparent contradiction, rather than just make an assertion.
     
  13. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    No, I have denied that gender is purely a social construct. Gender is not purely a social construct.

    There is no contradiction.
     
  14. Nanook_rubs_it

    Nanook_rubs_it Star commenter

    You do, but you have also put forward that

    So if they don’t ‘unfold of their own accord’, what is the process?

    The most certainly is!
     
  15. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    There second sentence refers to the first sentence. Here they are together:

    If you cherry-pick to give the appearance of a contradiction then you only give the appearance of a contradiction.

    There is no contradiction.
     
  16. Nanook_rubs_it

    Nanook_rubs_it Star commenter

    Nope - not buying it. You are good at assertion, but fail to build an argument.

    I dont think I even agree with the preceding sentence, that would depend on your definition of the ‘optimal expressions’ of male & female traits.

    Also you would need to describe the process by which ‘These expressions do not unfold of their own accord but develop in reaction to other people’.

    Then we might have a sensible discussion.
     
  17. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    It's not worth my time explaining these things to you given your perennial adversarialism.
     
  18. Nanook_rubs_it

    Nanook_rubs_it Star commenter

    Disappointing, but not surprising; chess playing pigeons come to mind :rolleyes:.
     
    TCSC47 likes this.
  19. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

  20. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    Whatever you say, Garry.

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page