Owing to a thread on the matter of women's success (or lack thereof as the case discussed) in MC, it raised greater questions in my mind. The debate concerning the talents of men versus women is age old, and I think we can all assume general equality, with perhaps a normal distribution of characteristic traits both across and within the sexes. The fact of the matter is, we cannot be exactly sure what is biological and what is due to environment. The two are inexorably intertwined, and arguing from a determinist position (whether it be biological or environmental) seems to be missing the point. MY point is this. If there really is equality, or indeed, if women are superior to men, then why have they historically been resigned to servile positions in society. Why did women's suffrage take so long? The fact that historically, and cross culturally patriarchy has dominated so often says something. Yes feminists will cry to the cows come home about male dominated social/political structures, but why did these arise in the first place! Are we to attribute it to some fortuitous (or malignant as the case from a women's perspective may be) occurrence that has led to an almost global preponderance of male domination historically? Maybe. But for all the equality assigned to the gender battles, I am just amazed how women haven't managed to subvert male power structures more significantly in the past. Men so often hold the keys to major positions of power, whether they be academic, political or industrial. And yes, there are female examples of this, but let's look at it more generally. You haven't really had a good run have you, girls.

Sorry dude... the 1970's is that way --->

Probably because men are physicaly stronger.

Hey Dunc, you actually going to engage with the question or throw around witless and hackneyed trash? The whole point is to find the root cause of this '1970s' attitude. Any of your thoughts on the primary cause would be welcome. As for physical strength...I guess that's one answer. But I'm inclined to think there is more to it. Let's get one thing straight too....I do not doubt equality of gender...I just want to know why gender roles have played out as they have (ie. one dominating the other). This isn't prejudiced derision, just a search for explanation of historical ‘fact’.

Why are you posting this cr@p on an MC forum?

Well little Duncy, if you read the original post you would see that it stemmed from the thread about women being poorer management consultants. I just wanted to extend it further, maybe talk about something other than salary/career progression. If you don't like it, then don't read it - or contribute. Oh you silly boy, getting all wound up at your own expense. Since you're no longer interested in this particular topic, I’ll take it you won't have the idiocy to post again – we wouldn’t want you getting any more worked up than you are already would we now!

Just a quick contribution to your debate Billy/Jean: we are looking at this gender/equality/balance of and excercise of power etc purely from a male perspective, and accordingly we dictate the agenda of what is considered desireable etc from same perspective. Is it not feasible, getting down to 1st principles, that women have and do excercise power, but that they are either more subtle about it than us men, or have for that matter historically chosen different arenas for the excercise of power - e.g. the power to control biology and therefore inheritance and therefore succession of material, status etc. Just a thought.Cue the lambast.

No debate needed, men are better than women - end of. Move on and talk about something important!

Yeah fair enough Mars, it's an interesting point. But if that were totally true then why is the move towards equality pursued by women one that aspires to 'male' ideals? For instance, equality in the workplace in terms of pay and promotion are goal espoused female ideals of equality, yet this succumbs to the same mentality of male competition. And do you really think not being able to vote, repression of freedom (especially in some religious spheres ie. Islam) and the subordination concurrent with the ideals of the 'good wife/baby making machine' are simply shrouded by gendered bias. To me they seem like general infringements on rights from whatever perspective one views them, and highlight historical hardship. If it is only a dire analysis from a male point of view then why are so many of the ladies complaining?

Behind powerful men there is often powerful women. I wonder how many wars have been fought over the years because a queen persuaded he king that the enemy were evil/taking the p1ss etc. Maybe the woman’s power historically lay in manipulating the thoughts of their men and shepherding them into making what the men thought of as their own decisions. Perhaps that is why it took so long for women to demand the vote/equality (lets ignore the fact that it was probably delayed due to the wars). If Claire was here she’d probably supply us with a more feminist view of the subject….

Let's face it. Women are never going to rule the world. It's a hideous, sexist fact, I know, but a fact nonetheless. How about we all stop pretending that life is fair, and that people are equal from birth. They are not, simply by virtue of situation and opportunity. Yes, theoretically, everyone should deserve rights but the practicalities (and realities) don't follow. This is, and always has been, a man's world. You are welcome to try and change it and slave away against the system, it's an admirable cause. Or you can just accept that it's a sh1tty situation and deal with it. The best form of idealism is realism.

Brap Brap!

In a pride of lions, the male is more or less useless except for fighting off other lions.Similar evolutionary forces might apply to human males. History is full of effective warriors that begat little copies of themselves, whether biologically (apparently everyone is a descendent of Genghis) or culturally (feudalism didn't spread because it was fun). Female warriors were presumably at a competitive disadvantage when it came to begetting little copies of themselves, so we ended up with men who were evolved for combat.Of course, being a warrior sucks unless you're top dog. Which might mean that men have evolved, biologically and culturally, to favour high risk tournament incentive schemes.Since politics, academia and business are all incentivised in this way, it'd be a neat explanation for the over representation of men in these fields.Alternatively, earlier male dominance may be the reason why these fields were thus incentivised in the first place.

We are far too busy having babies and ironing to worry about taking over the world. Additionally why would we want to after the mess you lot have made of it? Having said that I bet we will end up taking over the world if only to clear up the mess

I think it is down to two reasons:1) Women have babies - this takes them out of a career in MC, and its hard to get back in after extended periods, and the travel becomes hard to do2) When all is said and done, we can knock you out

I probably couldn't.

You used to hear a lot about "If only Women ruled the world there would be no wars" and all that...... women inhereting the earth and having no need for men once they'd extracted the sperm yada yada. Then we had Big Brother and America's/Britain's next top model and everyone realised that the above was a load of tosh.Can't believe "anon" is still spouting this sort of nonsense.

come on guys, who here doesn't like women eh? I think deep down we all enjoy their company in short bursts so lets embrace what we have and try to work with it.

Women love being subjugated.

I think I once saw a 419 e-mail which had the same density and 'feel' as the original post.

Two words for Billy/Jean: Verbal masturbation

Unfortunately I can't compete with someone who has an 'actual brain'. But I enjoy verbal masturbation, it relieves tension; and, luckily, you don't need a brain for it. Try it sometime, it's worgasmic.

I haven't read this thread, it seems long, complicated, poorly punctuated, and i have a particularly thrilling pivot table to concentrate on instead. that said, does the answer have something to do with peeing while standing?