By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
pizzahut451 on 18 January 2011
Edit Thread
sapphi_snake said:
pizzahut451 said:


So? A bow and gun are both fatal, only arrow stabs you in heart and a bullet goes trough you. Just because a weapon is more powerfull doesnt mean its more usefull.In 30 seconds, you can probably kill at least 6-9 people with bow and arrow and with a gun only 1-3 people. Bows and arrows WERE much more usefull than guns back than. Another FACT you are trying to denay.

 

There's no real strategy you can use against and army of people who have guns, while you yourself have none

There is actually. Especially if you have weapons that are much more faster and usefull than guns. its not like they had automatic guns back than. You had to reload every time you fired a single shot and that would take good 15-30 secs. Not to mention Africans had a total territorial advantige. They knew the war areas much better than Eurpoeans. They just got defeated because of Europeans advanced startegy and war logic, not to mention  they had better trained MALE soldiers that enslaved half of Africa. Maybe you should quit watching those clique action movies were small humble tribe destoryes thousands of soldeirs from a great empie (roman, english, french, spanish...) because they are such a amazing and well trained warriors by their ''culture'' (because cultures have amazing effect on the development of a human body, you know). And im sorry, but Asterix and Obelix DIDNT defend their villiage from Romans, Galls got defeated by them. Its NOT the reality. Im sorry, but the Eurpeans ensalved almost the whole world, and i dont think its only because they had guns (which were pretty lame back than)

this does however show you're a misogynist

I asked you nicely not to use that judgemental hippie ''ohhh your such a...'' liberal bullshit on me. its seriously starting to get old.

 

The men in the bolded sentence deserve to be called cowards because they used guns against opponents who had none, and immoral for deciding to steal their land and resources.

Read my second paraphraph. 

 

And that stuff IS NOT DICTATED by nature, it's culturally determined. All societies create cultural myths in order to naturalise their practices, hence why you believe all these gender stereotypes to be "natural". As for tthe animal examples, well animals on some level have "cultures" too, and they learn from immitation (there are also lots of examples of males being the ones who raise the child etc.).

 

why are you still denying this? if you're gonna keep this up, i wont seriously bother for 1 more second in this topic. It is a FUCKING FACT that men have generally superiour physical strenght than women. MEN were the ones who went to war, even in stone age, when no ''culture'' even eisted besides the one for survival. Another FACT. You keep brinigng africa, the place where they even send children to war. In all other civilizations around the world-Asian, Middle Eastern, Chinese, Japanese, North American, South American (for most part), European...in every region, in every culture the men were the ones to go to war. Its  history. Its ANOTHER fucking FACT. Culture has nothing to do with it, but nature. As for the animals, they learn from their instincts given to them by nature, and besides penguins, i really cant think of any other male animals that takes care of their babies.(tho im sure there are some more - who are in minority of course )

 

I wanted to bring counter arguments to all your points, but I don't have the time, and I doubt it's worth it. I'll just comment on your last paragraph. There was culture in the Stone Age (those cave paintings are proof of that, and also the existence of any type of organised society and practices which are passed down through immitiation - like hunting). Thee reson I keep bringing Africa in discussion is that some people (like yoruself) are uable to make distinctions between nature and culture, and the existence of such societies (regardless of whether or not they're the minority) is proof that what many consider to be natural is actually just a cultural practice (which cultures naturalise through myth in order to make them seem "natural" so that people don't question them). Cultural practices that nature caused. What led the frst generation of humans to hunt (that is the example you gave)? What led them to fight each other? To conqur other lands and tribes? Who did they immitate when they were the first humans on planet? Their monkey parents? You cant say cultural practice because there was no culture before them. It was in their nature.

Also, it's irrelevant what's happening in Africa today, as I was talking about African tribes which have disappeared long ago. Africans today have little in common with the African trribes of the past.Its less irrelevant than you think, seeing as african tribes are todays's africans grand grand...parents.  And no, african tribes didnt dissapear. There are still some active today.

And I couldn't help myself in also commenting on a point you made above: in fact culture plays a HUGE role in the development of a human body. A culture where, for example, the physical exercises of a particular group of people is encouraged will obviously produce individuals with different body types than a society which encourages said group to do take care of their physical conditions. You'd think something like this would be obvious.''Because a culture has such an amazing development in a human body development'' <---- I meant that in biological way.