I was reading this wikipedia article and it said that language and literature are "academic disciplines generally more associated with women"
WTF? this the first I've heard of it.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-11 1:20 ID:VZDwlpuz
just erase that part of the article
/thread
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-11 1:23 ID:VZDwlpuz
also it's bullshit. Noam Chomsky (a man) is the undisputed master of the modern linguistics field. The best writers today are harder to qualify, but for every Zadie Smith, there's a Ian McEwan, Don Delillo, and Kazuo Ishiguro waiting in the wings.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-11 1:36 ID:O8lISQX+
Men are simply intellectually superior. More women may study language and literature at university, but men still comprise the elite in these fields.
The wiki article must be influenced with the modern way of teaching literature, which is the "viewpoint" method, in which texts are explored from race, gender, economic and nationalist angles. Since these texts are often analyzed for gender assumptions, the gayfaggots in university tend to choose books written by women to offset the books written by men.
Anyone in a modern lit class would be given the strong impression that a lot of women write lit. And still the unis scream that they don't have a Liberal bias, blah blah blah.
So, the real truth is that women are so meek that we'll never know how they compete in learned fields.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-11 1:49 ID:ZKH4R7cL
I was just curious if there were a lot of women who STUDY literature/language. I know more about the situation when it comes to writers.
It seems no one here really knows much about the field of linguistics, which may support the theory that it's mostly women. since there are no women on the internet.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-11 1:52 ID:ZKH4R7cL
oh. also, it was talking about the INTEREST in lit/language as something associated with femininity. I'm curious about this because I have a very strong interest in language, and I'm a pretty effeminate guy, so I was wondering if there's a correlation.
no, not really, But as writing is a sort of creative thing, lit/language may appeal more to creative types, who may again not be all that buff, but that certainly doesn't mean you can't like lit/lang because you study, say, chemistry, you just like chemistry more.
Women avoid the hard sciences in university. (That's not as true as it used to be, and a larger percentage of technical professionals are now women.) So, it seems likely that as women in uni tend to slide into the Humanities and all that bullshit, one is given the impression that they prefer to study lit. It's still true that if you want to meet ladies in uni, take a course like literature or sociology; you're much more likely to sit next to a drop-dead BABE in those courses than in DiffEq.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-11 2:42 ID:BbtepOaj
That's what happens when you let them out of the kitchen
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-11 14:06 ID:Sey2oOPR
Karl Marx fucked up sociology.
Name:
uanime52007-09-12 18:26 ID:ixF8RC5D
>>10
Different genders like different things. Women are better at empathising, so they prefer courses that are more people based (in lit they read books and talk about the characters). By contrast men are more systematic and prefer processed based courses (such as mechanics, where you build things).
However just because men and women prefer different courses does not meant they are any good at either.
Let me get this straight woman are better at empahthising?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Your just mouthing off sterotypes there son. Woman are just as insenstive than men. Just because they like to shop, and are whiny doesnt make them more able to empathize with people. I've seen woman treat people in a way I wouldnt consider treating in a 100 years.
Feminists have spread the steroype of men being insensitive rapist monsters. I think men in a lot of ways are more sensitive than men.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-13 13:09 ID:ql4bj598
Philosophy is something which could be considered literature but is a male dominated field because it requires a strong emphasis on argument and logic.
I PERSONALLY BELIEVE THAT
>men in a lot of ways are more sensitive than men.
>men in a lot of ways are more sensitive than men.
>men in a lot of ways are more sensitive than men.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-13 15:25 ID:JkQMDyId
>>15
"I think men in a lot of ways are more sensitive than men."
wut.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-13 16:40 ID:6G/bYEAg
I meant Men are more sensitive than woman. Its a typo lol
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-13 20:25 ID:JkQMDyId
>>20
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS TYPOS. WHAT DID YOU REALLY MEAN?
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-14 4:23 ID:Fy8SVOTl
Women cook things in the kitchen whilst men go out to fight, think, rule and tend the machinery of the economy.
Sorry but I'm a feminine supremist -.- So fuck you.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-14 16:02 ID:bmYzaHyv
>>15
Women are far more likely to sympathize with others than men are (though women don't sympathize with everyone). This is why women are more likely to put up with an abusive relationship than men.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-14 20:33 ID:cdqZi0wL
>>25
Wrong, it is because they are far more cowardly. This is why it is much easier to have a tyranny when women are in the positions of power.