Are male superior over women?

Yes, females tend to pick up languages faster than males in primary school whereas males are better at mathematics, problem solving. This is why males dominate science and mathematics. Women are smarter than men on average, studies show this. This doesn't mean that women are 100% smarter than men, it just means on average they perform better than men in an academic institution. If you look at the top 10 smartest humans to have ever lived you'll find that all ten are males. Even today, the smartest man in the world Stephen Hawking stands superior on an intellectual field to any female (mathematics and science wise). You'll often find that in terms of occupations, whether it's law, business, medicine, males dominate the top 1%. Males make up for the majority of CEO's, the top surgeons in the world are dominated by males (Michael E. DeBakey, ivo pitanguy), the top 1% in lawyers are dominated by males also (despite women being more capable at speaking and languages in general). The top accountants are male, the richest humans on earth are males, the top bankers are male, the top stock brokers are males. Women may be smarter on average, but males dominate the 1%.

 

This actually goes along nicely with what I've seen. A large portion of my graduating class that went to post secondary education were women but the people with the highest grades in my graduating class were me and a another male student basically demonstrating another example of what you stated.

 

I didn't measure superiority by dependency so don't put words in my mouth. I just suggested a new question since the "Are male superiour over women" didn't really get us anywhere. OP's question suggests that he thinks males are in overal better than women. I suggested that if we asked "Which sex is less dependent on the other?" then we might agree on an answere and be done with the topic, cause atm it's just reading the same stuff over and over again.

Also I have no idea what are you trying to say with your dogs and cats comparison. Women and men are different species? Might want to clarify abit.

The way my mind thinks is (and hopefully yours aswell):
"less dependent on something" > "more dependent"
So if a man is less dependent on women (and other men aswell I guess) than a woman then for me he is better off. To me more dependency is a negative thing and my current vote would be: men > women

 

You said:

You would be measuring superiority by dependency in this case.

Measure - ascertain the size, amount, or degree of (something) by using an instrument or device marked in standard units or by comparing it with an object of known size.

See my response below.

It's straightforward. Superiority shouldn't defined by dependency, because in my example one would argue that dogs are superior to cats in strength, sense of smell, and vocalization. Superior is broad in that it ties to specific qualities rather than overall capability.

Superior - higher in rank, status, or quality.

The argument of dependency is really feeble since we all depend on something to survive. Being less or more dependent on something or someone doesn't signify superiority.

Yes, we know you're close minded. :nuts:

Can you give examples of women needing men more than vice versa?

 

Personally believe every human is equal, but the world is twisted so unfortunately everybody is treated differently.

 

Believe every human is equal.

 

Maybe physically superior but today everyone is pretty much equal now.

 

Maybe physically superior? Males are ABSOLUTELY physically superior to woman, there's no argument there... You don't need to read the scientific research to see this, it's right in front of you..

On an intellectual scale I'd say we are relatively even (although men seem to dominate the 1% as previously stated).

 

No, we are both very equal.

 

Physically men are dominate as stated you don't need evidence.
Women though to me are intellectually superior, its a more even playing field (gap is smaller to see then previously stated) but there far more emotionally developed and in touch with that side of their body.

 

They should be equal in a certain sense, but this is not just a one way street. The only way that this will occur is if they play both roles and let the men play both roles, because to say that some women are more superior than men is equvilent to saying some men are not superior to woman. Therefore once society deems a man to be less superior than a woman to be an acceptable stance, then we are golden. Considering that it is lazy if a man is a stay at home dad, that a man still must treat a lady with upmost respect (not solely for this purpose but some for this purpose) because they believe that they are superior, and that for the most part it is laughable when a woman rapes a man or if a woman abuses a man, that is not going over so well. It is perfectly acceptable for a woman to leech off an older man but yet it is not if a younger man is dating an older woman (and not even mooching). This conversation seems to be answered the wrong way a lot of the times. People only consider the improvements and not the cost of them.

 

yet to have heard a woman who changed the intellectual side of the academic realm in sciences and mathematics as profoundly as isaac newton, leonard euler, gauss, cantor, riemann, ect. It seems that all the people who profoundly change the world in such a way seems to be for the most part males. Although women have of course had an decent impact to such realms, but it dwarfs the amount that males have done. This is the case for a lot of academic fields. It really depends on what you are talking about with intellect especially when it comes to gender. This may be based on circumstance, but so far i havent found any earth shattering publications except for maybe Temple Grandin maybe, but she is not as close to being as big of an influence as the latter. In fact most of the publications from woman that i have seen that were popular in a sense were about the suffering of their gender.

 

Agreed. Someone previously stated that men usually dominate the 1% of most fields. As you said, males are the ones making profound changes in academic fields. The smartest humans to have ever walked the earth are predominately male.

 

Pretty equal seeing as men are the more dominant humans but women are the ones who give birth to us

 

You will get a lot of answers that are a no. There's no point of even bringing this question up.

 

in a lot of ways, yes we are. but we should be civilized enough to treat everyone equally.

 

Yes, plain n simple

 

Please stop with your bs, just because a child is heavily dependent on its parents doesn't mean the parents are superior. But you can surely do your mental gymnastics shit and say dependency = superiority. For me these are 2 different things. If I say that the success of my business depends on me having customers, then I don't mean that my customers are superior to me.

If you knew that a man and a woman would be put in a life and death situation. Would you bet on the woman or the man? I would put my money on the man because of reasons.

Idk if for you being alive vs being dead is higher in rank, status, or quality. I'd just prefer being alive.

You said that we all depend on something to survive. Let me ask you this. Who is more likely to get these things that we need to survive. If need be the average man could take these things from the average woman by force. Not talking about it being moral or not, just stating the facts. The aim of the game is to survive and reproduce and I state that men on average are better in both for obvious reasons.

Now that I have thought a bit more on this topic then I'll have to state that indeed biologically speaking men are superior to women, because they are more likely to survive and can spread more of their genes.

 

Speaking as a man, we are mentally equal.

 

You're contradicting yourself. You just said you can say that dependency equates to superiority without giving an example, and in the same breath say it doesn't make you superior.

What is the situation? You can't just say a man has a greater chance of survival without context.

What is the purpose in saying this? It has no relevance to what I'm saying.

Again, you're measuring superiority by strength. You have yet to explain what determines superiority.

Superior how? More likely to survive in what way? Spread more of their genes? How does the spreading of genes make one superior?

Your argument is piss poor.

@karlrais, care to respond?