http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/4636689/Men-really-do-see-half-naked-women-as-objects-scientists-claim.html
Warning: Activist research by feminists again. This is so stupid my brain is starting to hurt. Listen to this drivel.
"But what the brain scans show is that they are reacting to this photograph as people react to objects. It is as if they are not fully human."
They show pictures of women on paper and men's brains computed pictures as objects... well surprise, pictures are objects morons! That is exactly what one would expect when showing men objects. Pictures are not even partially human so why should are brains register it as such. Indeed, if women are seeing photos as something other than inadimate objects; that is a cause for concern. Is it reasonably out of the realm of common sense that a man's brain would recognize that the images being projected are not real and then re-categorize them as objects rather than human beings? Are we to think so little of modern technology reared men that we honestly believe their brains have not adapted to differentiate between flesh and blood and simple images portraying flesh and blood? Another issue is that of where are the womens results... like I said, maybe they are the ones with the problem if female brains CAN'T tell the difference between an image of a person and a real person and switch accordingly.
Perhaps that is why science and abstract thought such as law, philosophy and science is dominated by men. Our brains can actually differentiate the differences. This is why God set up the family hierarchy such as He has.
On a purely scientific level, what is the definition of "With men, who were known to have sexist tendencies" mean? I have yet to see such subjective, politically charged words used outside a womyn's studies department; let alone in a science lab. For all my good Catholic friends that don't connect the two, this is how sexist tendencies looks.
"the men He assigned all the affairs of the city, all the business of the marketplace, courts, council-chambers, armies and all the rest. A woman cannot throw a spear or hurl a javelin, but she can take up the distaff, weave cloth, and manage the household. She cannot give an opinion in council, but she can give her opinion in the household. Often, indeed, whatever her husband knows of household matters, she knows better. She cannot manage the city well, but she can raise children well, which are our greatest treasures." (St. John Chrysostom On Marriage and Family Life p. 96)
More scientific evidence as to why feminism is wrong and the Holy Catholic Church is right I'd say.
Warning: Activist research by feminists again. This is so stupid my brain is starting to hurt. Listen to this drivel.
"But what the brain scans show is that they are reacting to this photograph as people react to objects. It is as if they are not fully human."
They show pictures of women on paper and men's brains computed pictures as objects... well surprise, pictures are objects morons! That is exactly what one would expect when showing men objects. Pictures are not even partially human so why should are brains register it as such. Indeed, if women are seeing photos as something other than inadimate objects; that is a cause for concern. Is it reasonably out of the realm of common sense that a man's brain would recognize that the images being projected are not real and then re-categorize them as objects rather than human beings? Are we to think so little of modern technology reared men that we honestly believe their brains have not adapted to differentiate between flesh and blood and simple images portraying flesh and blood? Another issue is that of where are the womens results... like I said, maybe they are the ones with the problem if female brains CAN'T tell the difference between an image of a person and a real person and switch accordingly.
Perhaps that is why science and abstract thought such as law, philosophy and science is dominated by men. Our brains can actually differentiate the differences. This is why God set up the family hierarchy such as He has.
On a purely scientific level, what is the definition of "With men, who were known to have sexist tendencies" mean? I have yet to see such subjective, politically charged words used outside a womyn's studies department; let alone in a science lab. For all my good Catholic friends that don't connect the two, this is how sexist tendencies looks.
"the men He assigned all the affairs of the city, all the business of the marketplace, courts, council-chambers, armies and all the rest. A woman cannot throw a spear or hurl a javelin, but she can take up the distaff, weave cloth, and manage the household. She cannot give an opinion in council, but she can give her opinion in the household. Often, indeed, whatever her husband knows of household matters, she knows better. She cannot manage the city well, but she can raise children well, which are our greatest treasures." (St. John Chrysostom On Marriage and Family Life p. 96)More scientific evidence as to why feminism is wrong and the Holy Catholic Church is right I'd say.
No comments:
Post a Comment