|
Stories
| Home | About | Topics | Rejects | Abortions |
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained.
You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email
will not be read. Please read this
page if you have questions.
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained.
You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email
will not be read. Please read this
page if you have questions. |
||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
 |
Missing options. (none / 0) (#1) |
|
by because it isnt on Fri Apr 26th, 2002 at 03:11:26 AM PST |
|
|
|
Male and female genders are both useful to have, as all-male and all-female societies tend to die out. What would be useful to add to the poll:
adequacy.org -- because it isn't |
|
And finally, (5.00 / 2) (#2) |
|
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Apr 26th, 2002 at 07:41:48 AM PST |
|
|
|
|
|
woot! (none / 0) (#8) |
|
by ana on Sat Apr 27th, 2002 at 10:58:52 AM PST |
|
|
|
Just what I always wanted... a chance to be told I'm superfluous by the voting public! Why not? |
|
Come again? (none / 0) (#9) |
|
by tkatchev on Sat Apr 27th, 2002 at 01:27:28 PM PST |
|
|
|
Talking to yourself is a warning sign of schizophrenia! -- Peace and much love... |
|
I never post anonymously. (none / 0) (#13) |
|
by ana on Mon Apr 29th, 2002 at 02:23:32 PM PST |
|
|
|
Well, Pseudonymously, sure, but only under the one nick. Why not? |
|
Great. (none / 0) (#14) |
|
by tkatchev on Mon Apr 29th, 2002 at 02:40:19 PM PST |
|
|
|
Neither do I. Seriously, posting anonymously when you have an account is a very low, dirty trick. I don't like it at all. -- Peace and much love... |
|
Good ghod... (none / 0) (#3) |
|
by tkatchev on Fri Apr 26th, 2002 at 11:48:58 AM PST |
|
|
|
What are "New Men" and how are they different from the outdated model? -- Peace and much love... |
|
New men (5.00 / 2) (#6) |
|
by T Reginald Gibbons on Sat Apr 27th, 2002 at 07:47:29 AM PST |
|
|
|
I think they must be some sort of femi-guy, embodying the unthinkably effeminate traits of sensitivity and listening. By inference, I have arrived at the conclusion that all men who aren't New Men are out striding the wilderness with the Marlboro Man. With them, they take their linux powered laptop computers and their pocket version of the Silmarillion. Under the starry skies of the open range, they sing songs about hobbits using linux, and play games of chance involving 300 sided dice. They quaff deep quaffs of their chosen beverage and loudly damn those who quaff of lesser spirits, beers or fortified wines. Out there in the masculine wilderness, they are dreaming a dream of freedom, sir. Freedom and manliness, and atheism, and subservient women, and the extinction of the buffalo and the bison, and the gathering of wild ketchups, and the manly, godless, open range. |
|
yuck (-) (none / 0) (#7) |
|
by tkatchev on Sat Apr 27th, 2002 at 09:30:20 AM PST |
|
|
|
-- Peace and much love... |
|
300 sided die? FUCK NO! (none / 0) (#12) |
|
by because it isnt on Mon Apr 29th, 2002 at 03:24:56 AM PST |
|
|
|
REAL MEN do not use 300 sided die. REAL MEN either WIN or LOSE. adequacy.org -- because it isn't |
|
Isn't it obvious? (none / 0) (#5) |
|
by First Incision on Fri Apr 26th, 2002 at 11:02:34 PM PST |
|
|
|
With new cloning technologies, males are now completely superfluous. Females can simply self-implant a cloned embryo. There is no longer any need for the females to muddy their genes those of males. _ _ Do you suffer from late-night hacking? Ask your doctor about Protonix. |
|
gender is not superfluous. (none / 0) (#10) |
|
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Apr 28th, 2002 at 05:08:59 PM PST |
|
|
|
A cloned embryo can also be implanted in a pseudo-womb in a male, you know (www.malepregnancy.com). Females carry around all sorts of emotion baggage and such; sounds superfluous to me. |
|
Right. (none / 0) (#27) |
|
by hauntedattics on Mon May 6th, 2002 at 10:59:20 AM PST |
|
|
|
Because I've never met any men carrying around emotional baggage or anything... |
|
Consider this... (none / 0) (#11) |
|
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Apr 28th, 2002 at 06:05:02 PM PST |
|
|
|
That all people start out as females. It's only relatively late in their embryonic development that they become males.
Besides that, it's possible for a species to perpetuate itself with <A href="http://www.discovery.com/exp/lizards/wodads.html">only females</a>. Not to mention in many others males are pretty much <A href="http://hercules.users.netlink.co.uk/Bee.html">worthless</a>. Which tells you something. Let's face it. Men are ultimately less essential. We are an evolutionary novelty invented to promote genetic diversity. |
|
men are useless? (5.00 / 1) (#24) |
|
by Anonymous Reader on Sat May 4th, 2002 at 11:31:13 AM PST |
|
|
|
I think a society of women would starve to death, not wanting to debase themselves with hunting, even modern feedlot "harvesting" techniques. Not to mention all of those jars of pickles and such that would be useless -- unable to opened by anyone on the planet.
I don't see many female construction workers either. So what, would everyone just live in grass huts? Who would repair the automobiles that women love to parade themselves around with? Who would repair the septic system? Some might, but that one or two or three people might be awfully busy with 6 billion women nagging for attention. Women? A necessary evil. Even the neandertholic man knew this. |
|
This cannot be for real... (5.00 / 1) (#25) |
|
by tkatchev on Sat May 4th, 2002 at 12:20:26 PM PST |
|
|
|
"Neandertholic"? This must be some sick joke. :((
Sir, you are a genius, even if misguided. -- Peace and much love... |
|
you're wrong... (none / 0) (#30) |
|
by gohomeandshoveit on Sat May 11th, 2002 at 10:36:44 AM PST |
|
|
|
Even though we all do start out in a female body, we are not human until conception. When this occurs, we either receive a two X chromosomes from the mother or one X chromosome from the mother and a Y chromosome from the father. By definition, once that chromosome is determined, you are whichever sex that you received your second chromosome from. If that hurts your head, I suggest you go back to school and stop raiding this site with your ignorance. |
|
Call me conservative... (none / 0) (#15) |
|
by hauntedattics on Tue Apr 30th, 2002 at 08:30:03 AM PST |
|
|
|
but I don't see how either sex (not gender) can be superfluous, even in this age of cloning and artificial insemination. |
|
Sex. (none / 0) (#16) |
|
by tkatchev on Tue Apr 30th, 2002 at 11:10:39 AM PST |
|
|
|
Sex is pointless unless you're planning to have kids.
Trust me on this. -- Peace and much love... |
|
Trust you? (none / 0) (#17) |
|
by because it isnt on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 01:59:25 AM PST |
|
|
|
There's an entire industry built on your statement being untrue. If I can't trust you for investment advice, what can I trust you for? adequacy.org -- because it isn't |
|
People once believed that the Earth was flat, too (none / 0) (#18) |
|
by T Reginald Gibbons on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 04:17:04 AM PST |
|
|
|
Maybe it's time to address the possibility that the dissatisfaction most people feel with their sex lives is caused by the simple fact that sex is not inherently satisfying. Is it so hard to believe that sexual gratification might actually be a myth? The ridiculous song and dance people put on about sex smacks more of over-compensation than of genuine enjoyment and desire. |
|
It doesn't just "smack"... (none / 0) (#21) |
|
by tkatchev on Thu May 2nd, 2002 at 08:35:29 AM PST |
|
|
|
...it flat-out just is overcompensation, no doubt about it. -- Peace and much love... |
|
Surely, as a Russian, (none / 0) (#22) |
|
by because it isnt on Thu May 2nd, 2002 at 09:29:51 AM PST |
|
|
|
you know the tale about stone soup?
The "overcompensation", as you call it, is good. If it takes the act of coitus to recieve that lovely overcompensation, so be it. Sex, like the stone of the stone soup, is shrouded in mystery and is said to be the magic ingredient, but really, it's the embellishments that make the soup. adequacy.org -- because it isn't |
|
Investment? (none / 0) (#19) |
|
by First Incision on Wed May 1st, 2002 at 09:55:45 PM PST |
|
|
|
Where did you get the idea that Russians were EVER to be trusted for investment advice?
Investment advice from a natural-born American: Sex is pointless unless you're planning to have kids. Life is becoming increasingly more pointless. Invest in contraceptive companies. _ _ Do you suffer from late-night hacking? Ask your doctor about Protonix. |
|
Wow. (none / 0) (#20) |
|
by hauntedattics on Thu May 2nd, 2002 at 06:36:16 AM PST |
|
|
|
I submit a nitpicking post on word usage, and suddenly it's all about philosophy. My point was that the word "gender" should only be applied to nouns and adjectives, and that the poll should read "Which is the more superfluous sex?"
However, I like First Incision's investment advice. |
|
The "production" bottleneck (none / 0) (#23) |
|
by bushidocoder on Thu May 2nd, 2002 at 01:27:03 PM PST |
|
|
|
As women are the bottleneck in reproduction, they're the more critical of the genders. 5 men and 5 women can produce 5 children every nine months, 9 men and 1 woman can produce one child every nine months, but 1 man and 9 women can produce 9 children in 9 months (and one very sore man).
\bc |
|
They both are. (5.00 / 2) (#26) |
|
by arcus on Sun May 5th, 2002 at 12:35:23 PM PST |
|
|
|
Clearly, the most sucessful form of reproduction is the one practiced by bacteria: promiscuous random gene-swapping followed by good old-fashioned asexual mitosis. This combines the joys of sex and swap-meets and also means there isn't any particular concern over 'whose it is' as your child is indistinguishable from yourself.
This has resulted in bacteria basically winning out as the most sucessful form of life by any reasonable standards: number of species, genetic diversisty, number of individuals, biomass, etc. The only so-called 'standards' that they don't do well on are clearly question-begging and bigoted --- like 'intelligence' (if you happen to be a primate) or 'size' (if you happen to be a dinosaur). Considerations of this sort has resulted in Stephen J. Gould terming the entire time span between now and the beginning of the Cambrian as "The Age of Bacteria". |
|
dont you know? (none / 0) (#28) |
|
by Anonymous Reader on Thu May 9th, 2002 at 12:38:50 PM PST |
|
|
|
we men are lazy as all hell... all of us are dont deny it
whereas women tend to be more active and get things done... just take a look around, most of us are nerds where women are doing something useful |
|
it's been weeks... (none / 0) (#29) |
|
by gohomeandshoveit on Sat May 11th, 2002 at 10:28:43 AM PST |
|
|
|
...can we get a new poll yet? |
|
Where did the extra 1% go to? (none / 0) (#31) |
|
by tkatchev on Sun May 12th, 2002 at 11:54:29 AM PST |
|
|
|
Somehow, I think 48 and 51 do not add up to 100.
Open Sores strike again? Methinks somebody needs to re-read "Perl for Complete Idiots" again. Anyways, notice how the poll results almost (well, discounting the embarrasing Open Sores failure) exactly mimic the distribution of sexes in society? Is that an accident, or is the adequacy readership truly gender-balanced? -- Peace and much love... |
|
hurm (none / 0) (#32) |
|
by nathan on Sun May 12th, 2002 at 02:37:22 PM PST |
|
|
|
the poll results almost ... exactly mimic the distribution of sexes in society That only holds true if each sex is voting itself as superfluous. Maybe: Nathan -- Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards. |
 |
212 votes - 47 %
