"Why purposefully misrepresent what I'm saying?"

what misrepresentation? you said there are no psychological differences and i gave one example of why that is wrong

There is no pshychological difference between the sexes, it all depends on the individual. All points in the brain are the same for male and female. Any psychology claim that a female can make is the same possible psychological claim that a male can make. And don't give me examples of pregnant women please, I've already got a response for that kind of arguement. A females neurons are ported through axons to the same areas as they are in males. Some females, on average, end up porting more to the amygdala than the average male but that doesn't make females psychologically different when it all works in the EXACT same fashion. You can say women's psyche is different than men all you like, their brain is still working in the EXACT same fashion as a males brain.

"You honestly believe I don't know about the effects of testosterone and aggression? "

lol well if you do then why are we having this conversation?

Because you misrepresented me lol...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"women have testosterone as well!"

yes in comparatively small quantities which is why it is well known in society that men are comparatively more aggressive and ascertive on average

This does not negate that women have testosterone which was exactly my point that women's bodies are made up of and work the exact same way as a male's body 99% of the time. You could go ahead and list all the different placements of body parts and fluids and chemicals you like, but you will only be listing less than 0.5% of the female anatomy/cell structure/psyche. You pick.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I have never said I would call my female friends over to help me move."

its what we call a hypothetical situation... i used it as an example to demonstrate that there are situations where we automatically assume men are more capable than women and that is for a very very obvious reason

Better answer - I would call whoever I wanted to hang out with, whether that's women or men depends on my mood or who's available.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" If you think men are above women because men are better at basketball "

its hilarious that you can talk of misrepresentation ( which i have not done ) when you post this nonsense... who said any gender was above the other? go back and find me any example of me saying that shit i beg you

Hence the 'if', sorry but when you make it sound as though no one would call a girl up to help them move when it happens all the time then...I think it's justified. You should be thankful that I even put 'if' in there.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"You see, because I have morals, I am willing to accept women, blacks, hispanics, etc. as socially capable people."

that truly warms my heart it really does but its irrelevant and i hope you aren't saying here that i don't accept women because i acknowledge that they are different to men? because if that is your implication here then again you are wrong

Not my implication at all and I wouldn't stoop so low as to imply that.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

you haven't at any point here disproven my claim all you've really done as most people like you do is try to assume the so called moral high ground and it simply amazes me how people don't see the strings that are causing them to dance

I don't think you understand just how scientific my definitions are. I am pointing out that a persons capability is structured towards, but not limited to, a persons sex. This style of thinking engages the proponents of an individuals capabilities as opposed to the ever recycled 'battle of the sexes' cliche. The notion that women can't do what men do or that men can't do what women do is an arguement you have already brought up when you asked me, "Who wold you call to help you move, a guy or a girl"...what a question to highlight your bias.

In the context of this video, all men are made out to be assholes or rapists. Not a single positive example of a man is listed, and instead only examples of shitty people are listed. 

By my definition, yes, all feminists think men are rapists. However, there are women's rights activists who for some reason identify as feminist despite the stigma it carries. I refer to them as activists, since there are many people nowadays who just don't take feminists seriously. It makes them seem less like a whiny, incorrect first world brat and more like someone who is worried about their standing in their world. 

Aye Like I said, after all the house fires which have happened in homes with a toilet, it's almost 100% of the time, how haven't we reacted as a society to remove this menace!!!

Still tho, the fact that guys use those words at times, but no mention of girls ever using them, is Whore the new N word? like, it's their Word, guys can't use it tho! If that is the path this is aiming to go down... it's goal is to create a Them/Us situation, I don't really see a great end game for that.

Actually, here is the front of a leaflet I was handed from a Muslim in my local town on Saturday. (I live in a Northern English town for geographical reference)

I find it sad that they feel the need to have to explain anything.

True, though (and this is admittedly largely semantics) I do think it's impotant to set the distinction that all the 'bad,' (basically, malicious or ill intent,) is the fault of the aggressor. :/ In essense, while I think it is vital to educate people in how to best avoid putting themselves in situation of overt danger or risk, the actual responsibility for the act itself should remain firmly in the hands of the person carrying said act out. I.E. 'There are really, REALLY shitty people out there, and there's not much, if anything, you can do to dissuade them from doing shitty things to you.'

This is partly because as I said before, it's inherently difficult to predict if someone you've never before met might mean you harm, and constant vigilence is something I find pretty vital, even if it's something as simple as not letting yourself drift off to sleep in an exposed venue. Especially given there are acts of violence that can genuinely be causeless, to the point of nonsensical, the lesson should be made that '...and even if you do ALL this stuff I just said... honestly, something bad might still happen, and if it does, it's not your fault, and you should know that you can tell me ANYTHING and we'll work through it together.'

Just because you're more likely to be assaulted in a violent neighborhood with your Mercedes-Benz doesn't mean you might not still get jumped in an otherwise safe region... the difference being that in the violent neighborhood, you might take even the basic precaution of not daudling about, and locking your doors while rolling up your windows, while in the safer region you do none of these things and are in fact even more easily assaulted as a result. =P

In other words you have your own agenda against something protruding your emotional standing towards feminism. Because I can't possibly understand why you would think all feminists assume men are rapists...