|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The study found that mothers were an important influence on their children's ability to cooperate, especially when the child was between two and three. However, the extent of a father's involvement in caring for a child between birth to five years old was found to be more influential on a child's ability to cooperate and obey instructions when they started school.
Children whose fathers rarely looked after them were more likely to be hyperactive or have other behaviour problems in their first year of school.
The study's author, Kay Margetts, a lecturer in early childhood education at Melbourne University, said more research was needed to discover why father care was so important in helping a child adjust to school.
There was a time when it was said that men were more logical than women. These days it is common to use the term 'linear' instead, and to praise women's supposed 'multi-processing' capabilities. The reason for this change of language is well illustrated by an exchange that took place on a radio phone-in show I heard in about 1995. The guest was a psychologist, and the discussion was about the differences between how men and women think. One caller - a woman - rang in and said that men were more logical than women. The psychologist interrupted her and said that the word 'logical' had certain 'positive connotations', and that the word 'linear' should be used instead.
Many men - and some women - will sometimes jokingly say that women don't make sense. Some of you may know women who babble on about anything and everything, often quite unrelated to anything that's happening, or continuing as if uninterrupted some conversation they started the previous day. These days it's not unusual to label anything women do as wonderful, and better than whatever men do in the same situation. But that's only the product of feminist bullying, and serves to obscure the truth in many areas. Perhaps, then, the reason why children benefit from men's involvement is that men quite simply are more logical than women.
What does 'logical' mean in this instance? It means consistent, ordered, and devoid of unnecessary tangents. In other words, men make more sense. Men pre-filter and pre-order reality, whereas women mearly reflect it in verbal form. That's a gross simplification, but hey; I'm a man. I make order where there is chaos!
Men's superior ability to make sense of things helps children to relate to the world around them. We strip away the complex surface layers to reveal a simpler order underneath. We set boundaries, we draw lines. Our much-maligned urge to offer solutions to problems is the ideal interface for satisfying children's curiosity. Our directness is just what a young child who's just got a grip of language needs. We can say 'Yes' and 'No', not just 'Maybe' or 'Possibly' or 'It depends'. In short, we offer children a degree of certainty that women simply don't.
Before anyone replies with the tedious refrain that 'women can be logical and men can be illogical', let me say that I know they can. Generally, however, I think it is men that have the upper hand when it comes to clarity of thought. As I said above, it is feminist bullying - and their invention of Marxist-style accusations of wrong-headedness - that have made it heretical to suggest that men might actually have intrinsic positive qualities of their own. I hope we're all in recovery from that insideous form of brainwashing. Reports like the one above, and the one about how both men and women benefit from marriage, will gradually reveal the simple truth behind all the feminist lies and misinformation of the last three decades. A society that turns its back on its menfolk is ignoring possibly its greatest resource.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If women are so good at multitasking, then why is it that almost none of them sign up for computer science courses? Programming requires heavy amounts of mental partitioning and parallell tasking. If we're so "linear" then why do we all use object-oriented, event-driven programming languages rather than procedural (linear) languages?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday October 07, @04:37PM EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Damn good questions, Hunsvotti. Shows ta go ya that these "researchers" really do not know what they are talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday October 07, @04:44PM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
The term "multi-tasking" too often used wrongly. When someone talks about a woman who multi-tasks, they usually mean a woman who does several things in one day. An example I heard on women's forum TV show is that women work, pick up children, do housework, etc., all in one day.
This isn't multi-tasking. Multi-tasking is doing more than one thing at the same time. For example, running while listening to a CD player is multi-tasking.
A woman (or a man, for that matter) who works, picks up children, cleans, etc. is not multi-tasking. She's doing one thing after another, but this is how the term "multi-tasking" is often used, and incorrectly so. If she were truly multi-tasking, she would be at work working, at home cleaning, and in the car with children all at the same. This is clearly impossible (unless the woman cloned herself).
Switching from one task to another is what multi-tasking generally refers to. This is usually inefficient and can be dangerous, depending on the tasks being done. It's only the least bit efficient when the tasks being done are very remedial, as in the running example above.
I think that's all I have to say about this.
- Josh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday October 07, @04:50PM EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
We use object-oriented design because dealing with smaller pieces is easier to use and maintain than dealing with the inefficient and clustered methods of procedural programminng.
The breaking down of objects is called set-breaking (or logical reasoning or mathematical reasoning) which just about all cognitive psychologists specializing in cognitive sex differences agree that men excel at (I hope I don't get called a misogynist or a sexist for saying this).
- Josh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I hope I don't get called a misogynist or a sexist for saying this.
I hope you were kidding when you said this. However, many men do feel that they have to appologise for even implying that men might be just slightly better than women at something. These same men usually feel much more comfortable saying that, of course, women are so much better at everything than men. This is an attitude that affects many professionals, such as those examining sex differences. Their default assumption is that men are inherantly inferior to women in all regards, and so, in accordance with feminist orthodoxy, any area in which women are doing measurably worse than men is a sign of discrimination. That they think they can prove how non-sexist they are by endlessly denigrating the male sex tells you everything you need to know about the real meaning and purpose of the word 'sexist'.
The word 'sexist' was designed to control how people think about certain issues. Specifically, it was designed to destroy any conception that men might be superior to women in any respect. It does not work the other way around, which is why the active denigration of men is construed as a means to demonstrate how 'non-sexist' one is. There is no appropriate application of the word 'sexist' that is not better and more accurately served by the use of the word 'wrong', but the use of 'wrong' would severely limit the overall scope of application. The word 'wrong' also has no political potential and allows for contradiction and debate, neither of which are permitted by 'sexism'. For these reasons (and a few more besides) I have decided that the word 'sexist' is a manhating word.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday October 08, @08:11AM EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, I was trying to sound sarcastic.
- Josh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We should certainly remember where much of this 'information' is coming from. Its coming from groups who know how to get to their 'market target audience'. Thats right. The show, article, university study, whatever wouldnt do so well telling women that men had it just as bad if not worse. I'm saying neither, but I am saying, they are brilliant sales pitches. They create hostility among the ignorant.
I remember watching a tv show that women would typically watch. The men would go hunting as it was their gender role. They had on brand new clothes and it was casual easy work and fun was had by all. The women had ragged clothes had to lug heavy pots to get water jars filled up. They had depicted them horrendously as their lives were far more worse off. TV shows on in the afternoon or whatever time slot showing how brutal women's lives were and how easy men had it. Social Justice and ground level ignorance have the same head office.
.
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm, men are so linear and logical that they get the nobel peace prize 25 times as often as women. ;-)
So linear that the vast majority of spiritual leaders and theorists in the world are and have always been male.
Of course it is true that there has never been a female world chess champion...
Lots of famous male artists, musicians, writers, etc. Logical and linear. Yeah, right. Men have a tremendous amount to offer and have often been willing to share this with the world.
Stand Your Ground Forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday October 09, @11:22PM EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
...Yeah, and how many female GENIUSES have there been...?
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
