The Philosophy Forums at OnlinePhilosophyClub.com aim to be an oasis of intelligent in-depth civil debate and discussion. Topics discussed extend far beyond philosophy and philosophers. What makes us a philosophy forum is more about our approach to the discussions than what subject is being debated. Common topics include but are absolutely not limited to neuroscience, psychology, sociology, cosmology, religion, political theory, ethics, and so much more.
This is a humans-only philosophy club. We strictly prohibit bots and AIs from joining.
Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.
This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"). Those kind of questions can be asked in the off-topic section.
Sculptor1 wrote: ↑July 8th, 2022, 7:02 am
It just sounds like you are blaming your lack of achievement on others.
None of us are born on an even playing field, but it is too easy to focus all your attention on something else rather than change yourself.
Blaming others? Change?
Oh, she takes care of herself
She can wait if she wants
She's ahead of her time
Oh, and she never gives out
And she never gives in
She just changes her mind
She does not need taking care of, nor change according to what you tell her. She just changes her mind. You not happy? Too bad. Know what: she is always a woman. REMEMBER that.
Sculptor1 wrote: ↑July 8th, 2022, 7:02 am
It just sounds like you are blaming your lack of achievement on others.
None of us are born on an even playing field, but it is too easy to focus all your attention on something else rather than change yourself.
Blaming others? Change?
Oh, she takes care of herself
She can wait if she wants
She's ahead of her time
Oh, and she never gives out
And she never gives in
She just changes her mind
She does not need taking care of, nor change according to what you tell her. She just changes her mind. You not happy? Too bad. Know what: she is always a woman. REMEMBER that.
Tut tut.
My mother used to admonish me for using "she" rather than a persons name. "Who's "She", the cat's mother?". And my mother was quite right to teach me to show respect for all.
Aside from that I really have nothing else to say to your seemingly unhinged outburst.
I always heard that lyric as saying that a male can never totally put on one side his romantic desire for an attractive woman. That however admirable or frustrating a person she may be, his response to that behaviour is always blunted by background awareness of her as a potential bedmate/soulmate.
It says "You're OK by me, because I never forget that you're a woman and I'm a man and if you ever wanted to we could take it further".
It's a gentle acknowledgment of unrequited attraction.
Which may be politically incorrect these days...
"Opinions are fiercest.. ..when the evidence to support or refute them is weakest" - Druin Burch
Good_Egg wrote: ↑July 11th, 2022, 1:02 pm
I always heard that lyric as saying that a male can never totally put on one side his romantic desire for an attractive woman. That however admirable or frustrating a person she may be, his response to that behaviour is always blunted by background awareness of her as a potential bedmate/soulmate.
It says "You're OK by me, because I never forget that you're a woman and I'm a man and if you ever wanted to we could take it further".
It's a gentle acknowledgment of unrequited attraction.
What lyric? Please quote. "a male can never totally put on one side his romantic desire for an attractive woman" may be true, but the woman he may come across is not subject to his discretion. She is flesh and blood, and she is liberated from centuries of sex degradation. His best bet is to find out and accept what she truly is.
Spider sexes have fun interactions. The female eats the male. This makes her more succulent for the time when her babies eat her.
I like Dawkins's ideas based on game theory in The Selfish Gene, where he not only examines the inherent tension and cooperation between the sexes, but also between the generations. He goes to great pains to say that these cannot be validly extrapolated to human interaction but, as you will see, that is not easy!
I have forgotten much of the detail, but I do remember two major gender-based strategies found different species - "He Man" and "Domestic Bliss". The former consists of a dominant male who has exclusive rights to his "harem" and aggressively fights off any males trying to sneak in a bit of sex with his females on the side. Of course, at some point he will get old or is injured and a young up-and-coming male will fight and beat him, winning the right to the harem. An example would be elephant seals. In these species, there is marked sexual dimorphism. The females exclusively care for the pups, and often need to protect them from males.
The "Domestic Bliss" strategy is exemplified in bird species, where the male puts much energy into building a nest with which to attract a female. Since his investment is high, he cooperates in the raising of the offspring. Females, being the ones with the eggs, almost always make a significant investment into their offspring. In Domestic Bliss relationships, the male also puts in significant investment, hence his contributions - to make sure that the investment of time and energy is successful.
We see echoes of each strategy in different human cultures and, especially, subcultures.
Sy Borg wrote: ↑July 14th, 2022, 2:31 am
Spider sexes have fun interactions. The female eats the male. This makes her more succulent for the time when her babies eat her.
I like Dawkins's ideas based on game theory in The Selfish Gene, where he not only examines the inherent tension and cooperation between the sexes, but also between the generations. He goes to great pains to say that these cannot be validly extrapolated to human interaction but, as you will see, that is not easy!
I have forgotten much of the detail, but I do remember two major gender-based strategies found different species - "He Man" and "Domestic Bliss". The former consists of a dominant male who has exclusive rights to his "harem" and aggressively fights off any males trying to sneak in a bit of sex with his females on the side. Of course, at some point he will get old or is injured and a young up-and-coming male will fight and beat him, winning the right to the harem. An example would be elephant seals. In these species, there is marked sexual dimorphism. The females exclusively care for the pups, and often need to protect them from males.
The "Domestic Bliss" strategy is exemplified in bird species, where the male puts much energy into building a nest with which to attract a female. Since his investment is high, he cooperates in the raising of the offspring. Females, being the ones with the eggs, almost always make a significant investment into their offspring. In Domestic Bliss relationships, the male also puts in significant investment, hence his contributions - to make sure that the investment of time and energy is successful.
We see echoes of each strategy in different human cultures and, especially, subcultures.
In contemporary modern society, members are no longer concerned about passing the genes. With birth control, woman calls the shot, but not her genes. Rather than carrying the burden of pregnancy and childbirth, many would seek not to sacrifice the time and effort. In this respect, the two strategies above no longer applies. A woman can on longer be blamed for not giving birth to the next generation. Fair enough.
Sy Borg wrote: ↑July 14th, 2022, 2:31 am
Spider sexes have fun interactions. The female eats the male. This makes her more succulent for the time when her babies eat her.
I like Dawkins's ideas based on game theory in The Selfish Gene, where he not only examines the inherent tension and cooperation between the sexes, but also between the generations. He goes to great pains to say that these cannot be validly extrapolated to human interaction but, as you will see, that is not easy!
I have forgotten much of the detail, but I do remember two major gender-based strategies found different species - "He Man" and "Domestic Bliss". The former consists of a dominant male who has exclusive rights to his "harem" and aggressively fights off any males trying to sneak in a bit of sex with his females on the side. Of course, at some point he will get old or is injured and a young up-and-coming male will fight and beat him, winning the right to the harem. An example would be elephant seals. In these species, there is marked sexual dimorphism. The females exclusively care for the pups, and often need to protect them from males.
The "Domestic Bliss" strategy is exemplified in bird species, where the male puts much energy into building a nest with which to attract a female. Since his investment is high, he cooperates in the raising of the offspring. Females, being the ones with the eggs, almost always make a significant investment into their offspring. In Domestic Bliss relationships, the male also puts in significant investment, hence his contributions - to make sure that the investment of time and energy is successful.
We see echoes of each strategy in different human cultures and, especially, subcultures.
In contemporary modern society, members are no longer concerned about passing the genes. With birth control, woman calls the shot, but not her genes. Rather than carrying the burden of pregnancy and childbirth, many would seek not to sacrifice the time and effort. In this respect, the two strategies above no longer applies. A woman can on longer be blamed for not giving birth to the next generation. Fair enough.
The strategies still apply in a cultural sense, but there is no genetic imperative when there's many times more people humans than is sustainable, despite what Elon Musk claims.
Good_Egg wrote: ↑July 11th, 2022, 1:02 pm
It says "You're OK by me, because I never forget that you're a woman and I'm a man and if you ever wanted to we could take it further".
It's a gentle acknowledgment of unrequited attraction.
natures says: opposites attract. This applies to sex and gender. We humans are complex social animal. We have gone beyond attraction between man and woman. She is always a woman means she is not defined by what attracts you as a man. She stands on her own right, not necessarily even to attract you in return. You do not chisel her. She makes herself, whether you like it or not.
, using the Joel lyric in the title is trying to describe the idea of women, when viewed from the perspective of a nonwoman, who is under the influence of love, lust, infatuation for a woman.
jonazop wrote: ↑September 12th, 2022, 4:21 pm
, using the Joel lyric in the title is trying to describe the idea of women, when viewed from the perspective of a nonwoman, who is under the influence of love, lust, infatuation for a woman.