Sunday, July 29, 2007

Why Female Gender Supremacy is Ignorant Crap, part 1 of 87

I don't know that it's going to take me 87 parts to cover what should be frickin' obvious to any thinking human being, but when I look around online, I think it might take more than 87. We'll see how it goes. Clearly everybody wasn't taking notes the first time I did this, in a 1 of 1.

The natural question to ask myself is, why bother? Why bother paying any attention to craptastic quotes like this gem posted on another blog today:

"You are the male of the future and your message is an important one. The Female Gender is the superior gender. I am not saying males are useless, they are the yin to our yang, but the best male is one who understands his role as helpmate and passive." -Maitresse Blanca's comment

I try to ignore it, believe me, but this shit is everywhere.

Why bother? Somebody has to. If the intelligent, thinking female doms and male submissives keep ignoring this crap and not addressing it head on, it will never get addressed. Everybody else is too busy laughing their asses off at such ridiculous statements, when they aren't in stitches or up in arms over male supremacy in Gor. Or when they aren't writing all female doms and male submissives off as fucking nutters.

We have a perfectly good sexual kink being twisted into a KKKesque supremacy philosophy and you're just sitting there. (I could go to Nazi, if you like, but I'll stop at KKK, unless somebody really pisses me off, and then I'm pulling out the big guns.) God forbid you are drinking it in.

This is embarrassing, people. Embarrassing! It's like attending a University science school that has a small group of religious zealots preaching Creation Science with megaphones. Imagine them getting all the press attention, them pretending that of course, all of the University believed and preached Creation Science. Not only would I be mortified, but I'd eventually have to look up from my legitmate lab work and say something.

In Part One, I'll start off easy.

This is a sexual kink.

Being a dominant woman or a submissive man is a sexual kink. You can make a sexual kink into a lifestyle, if you like, or you can keep it for sex play, but you are deluded if you try to make the whole rest of the fucking world fit your own sexual kink. Not to mention making yourself look very, very silly in the process.

"Ah, I'm kinky turned on by imagining submitting to a woman, therefore this is the One True Way and all men should be submitting to all women all the time." 'cause god knows, you couldn't be like specially perverted or something.

Pervert used in a good fashion, okay?

There are lots and lots of flavors to our kink. Mine is flavored sadistic. I am sexually turned on by hurting men. Wheeeeeeee! It's fun. If I conjure up a fantasy universe, wait I have, it has men getting hurt by women all of the time.

Wheeeeee! I'm perverted!

Pervert used in a good fashion, okay?

What the fuck do my perversions have to do with the real world? I am now going to use my perversion to believe that the world is flat, the sun revolves around the Earth, that dinosaurs lived at the same time as mankind and that all women want to hurt men and all men want to be hurt 24/7.

Okay. Part One was a little rambly. I hear Part Two is radical cogent.



Gender Supremacists in BDSM

Nearly everything BJ ever wrote.


This just in. Here are the blog reactions for this post. If you're interested in the topic, you'll want to check out these blogs, too:

SM Feminist
Maybe Maimed..
A Place to Draw Blood Laughing
Letters from Gehenna
Maybe Maimed...


Eileen said...

I *screamed* at the computer this morning when I read the blog entry you linked. May thought I'd hurt myself or something.

There is outrage. There will be posting. Thanks for beating me to it :).

maymay said...

Yeah, seriously. I thought there was something terribly wrong. Then I realized there was, but that it wasn't with Eileen's reaction.

nigel said...

Dear Mame,

There is a lot of truth in what you write and Women do have the ability to make men better people, but I have some difficulty with the word "superior" because all humans are fallable. Moreover this word and concept has so many conotations. Matriarchy is in the ascendancy and society will find benefit, so why can't we "get over" this heirarchy debate.

Elizabeth said...

Nigel first!

Nigel, hi Nigel! :)

I went looking for your blog yesterday because I hadn't heard anything out of you for awhile. I couldn't find it.

So, I'm so glad you stopped by because now I've found it. The URL has changed. Missed you!

Anyway, here we go.

You and I are going to disagree on the "matriarchy is ascending" thing. I don't believe it is and I don't want it to, even if I did believe it was.

In parts 2 thru 87, I hope I don't say anything that personally offends you, because I just adore you and that would make me sad.

I feel very strongly about what I see around, though. Attaching gender supremacy to sexuality is wrong...well, attaching any kind of supremacy to anything is wrong.

The thing these people write, Nigel, if you replaced the word "men" with any race, ethnicity, whatever, you'd recoil in horror.

Where's the horror. I'll bring the horror. ;)

missed you, E

Elizabeth said...

Eileen & Maymay

I believe BJ said it best.

Thank god you're here.

hugs, E

iobey said...

Why is one person's point of view so unacceptable to others? If she believes in Female Supremacy - than so be it. There is a desire for men to openly submit to the leadership and decision-making prowess of women. I'm one man who is all for it.


Elizabeth said...

John -

Let me write it for you this way and see if it will click how horrible this stuff is:

"You are the black person of the future and your message is an important one. The White Race is the superior race. I am not saying blacks are useless, they are the yin to our yang, but the best black is one who understands his role as helpmate and passive."

WTF? Seriously.

You don't just sit back while people publish shit like that. You speak up.

It's ignorant crap.

I get that it turns you on, and whatever floats your boat sexually is aokay.

As a philsophy to espouse? Ignorant crap.


Trinity said...

You win.

Elizabeth said...

I only win if it all goes away tomorrow.

But thanks. Hope you liked the fruit basket. :)


Trinity said...

oh and pardon me if this is nitpicky but I'd rather sm-f not be called femdom -- I'm the only female top who posts there that is into men, and even I'm bisexual.

I'm flattered by all the attention, but the assumption sm-f is somehow mine or mostly mine is a bit offputting.

And, well... this could be my own personal weirdness but to me "femdom" is a particular kind of heterosexual bdsm that isn't really the kind I identify with. If I'm anything I'm pansexual leather.

nigel said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Elizabeth said...

Hi Trinity -

I'll move the blog in a moment.

Words give me such a headache. It will shock you to find out I get eclectic traffic here, really all walks of life/sexual orientation :), so I try to grab for the words with the most common understanding.

Which is problematic with words with twisted common understanding.

"The" is usually safe, "and" works. :)

Throwing labels on the blog list about killed me. In my perfect world, there would be no label on anything or anyone....except food. I like food labels.

Oh, and I read the other fine bloggers over at SM, too. I read everything there. Smart women.

hugs, E

iobey said...

"You are the black person of the future and your message is an important one. The White Race is the superior race. I am not saying blacks are useless, they are the yin to our yang, but the best black is one who understands his role as helpmate and passive."

Interesting but the argument doesn't work. We're not talking about race superiority, we're talking about gender superiority. There are many who believe females are innately superior to males. Disagree if you want, but stick to the topic at hand. This isn't about skin color.


Karl Elvis said...

'I could go to Nazi, if you like'

...but then, we'd have to invoke Godwin's Law

James said...

iobey: There are many who believe white people are innately superior to black. Doesn't come close to making it true, though.

So, no, it is exactly equivalent; the only difference is that your particular supremacy-politics have not been acted out on a grand scale in real life, whereas the race based ones have. The result would be equally disgusting and oppressive.

Trinity said...

"We're not talking about race superiority, we're talking about gender superiority."

And how are these things different in any way?

Wait, don't answer that, people confusing masturbation fodder with logic depresses me utterly.

Trinity said...

Oh, and on "many who believe":

If many people jumped off a bridge, would you?

Eileen said...

My reaction to this issue is now over on my blog, should you be curious to see what I had to say.

Bitchy Jones said...

I'm off shagging. You and Eileen are in charge of fixing femdom until I get back.

Alexis said...

"We have a perfectly good sexual kink being twisted into a KKKesque supremacy philosophy."

Well. Up until now, I wasn't clear that you and your minions OWNED this kink.

Since there are evidentiary remains of this "perfect" kink being mixed up with philosophy going back some 3 centuries in literature, I'm prepared to believe that the use of the verb tense "being twisted" was really a sort of ignorant failure to understand that it should have been "was twisted." Before your great-grandmother was born.

Sad for you, it means you'll have to go on screaming until the next generation can come along and carry that baton for you.

Sucks to be you.

As for the rest of us...clearly a small, small majority on this particular blog...we find part of the "perfect" enjoyment of this kink involves its "Esque" qualities. Not being among the josie-come-latelys in the world who have obviously never read any literature written before 1992...we're quite happy that it was twisted, it is being twisted, and that it will continue to be twisted.

In spite of shrieking harpy-like wailing.

Elizabeth said...

Tiny bit of time to respond right this random order, let's see, how about Alexis first.

Hi Alexis!

So, seriously, you're telling me that *you* are all over declaring women superior to men. Really?

The only other time you've been here, you've left a comment with as superior and condescending a tone as this one. And the comments I've seen you leave on (some)other women's blogs have been just as "I am soooo, much smarter and more educated and more experienced than you, you stupid, ignorant woman" toned.


So seriously. Write me back. Tell me that I'm superior to you because I'm a woman and you're a man.

Do it. Be all humble and everything when you do. Grovel a little.

I'll be here waiting. ;)

hugs, E

Elizabeth said...

No particular order, how about my my good friends Bitchy Jones and Karl Elvis.

Karl Elvis -

Sigh. I know. Godwin's Law. I forgot what the name of the law was but I knew it was out there. I didn't *technically* break it, I just threatened to.

Keep me in line, will 'ya? ;)

BJ -

Oh, she gets shagged by famous London landmarks and now she's all "too busy for anything but foo foo" and shit.

Fine. Sit this one out. There's always part two.

hugs, E

Elizabeth said...

James & Trinity,

Thanks. That's what I would have said but you guys probably said it better.


What they said. Really. It really *is* the equivalent. That's really what it sounds like and that's really how it's taken. That bad.

Not kidding. The same stab to the stomach to read it as if reading white supremacist stuff. Honestly.


Beeeeej said...

You don't need me. But if it gets too sticky, just shriek like a harpy and I'll come running

Elizabeth said...

Nigel -

You got it and BIG hugs to you. Big hugs. Email me anytime you like.


I think the only comment I have left is Eileen's, in which case no comment and off to read.

Thanks, everybody.

Elizabeth said...

Hi Trinity -
Real quick. I accidently lost your 12:35 comment for a few hours in moderation. Rescued! Sorry it took me so long.


Eileen said...

Elizabeth, am I allowed to cross-talk your commenters?

Clearly, the point that Elizabeth is making is not that she's taking ownership of this kink. The point is that she sees other people taking ownership of it, and doesn't like the way they're doing it. Any one person who tries to "own" a kink presumes to speak for all persons involved. That's what happens when people make generalizations, especially generalizations that are based on some kind of established power dynamic.

Take you, for instance. As Elizabeth so very sweetly pointed out, if you subscribed fully to the belief she quoted, you'd have approached her as your superior, because you identify (on your blogger profile) as male, and she identifies as female.

And then there's the use of past tense and present tense. While you are correct that this kink was twisted long ago, what you fail to recognize is that the process of examination, discovery, and learning is ongoing throughout generations. Elizabeth's use of the phrase "is being twisted" is perfectly accurate; people are still twisting this kink by expressing their opinions and influencing the decisions of people who are unaware of the past three centuries of literature. The comment that Elizabeth quoted may have had its roots in literary and cultural traditions of the past, but it was only written a few days ago.

Similarly, because the process of discovery and education is ongoing, it's completely appropriate for anyone who wants to to stand up and say something in disagreement to do so at any time. The next generation will thank us.

Alos, since you seem to like grammar: she wrote "perfectly good," not "perfect." They're very different.

Finally, you yourself prove Elizabeth's point by emphasizing the "esque" part of her comment. If you want to enjoy the part of your sexuality that mimics or resembles sexism, go for it - that's not what she's arguing against. What she's arguing against is the propogation of sexism as a worldview that extends beyond the bedroom. That's what generalizations imply, and that's what we're screeching about.

Elizabeth said...

Eileen -

Please and thank you. Someone has to do the heavy lifting now that BJ is off snogging about....

Thanks! E

Trinity said...

"Take you, for instance. As Elizabeth so very sweetly pointed out, if you subscribed fully to the belief she quoted, you'd have approached her as your superior, because you identify (on your blogger profile) as male, and she identifies as female."


taking a cue from Emeril: BAM!

Dw3t-Hthr said...

My commentary on this was sort of sideways of on-topic, so I posted it at my place instead.

Kate said...


Boy! Did you stir the pot! BJ must be proud (or will be when she's done), I know I am!

And I know that it really pisses me off, when supposedly 'submissive' men tell me how to be a dom. Kinda shows how much they really missed the point of all this...sorry fellas...this MAY have started out as a male kink...but we wimmen folk LIKE the idea and have made it our our own style...go whine elsewhere...


Alexis said...

Nope, no groveling.

My arguments, found on my blog, make it clear that I find "women" to be superior. Not necessarily you.

Part of the assumption made by women who get sensitive about being identified as part of a superior gender is the immediate assumption that there's no shading going on here; in other words, that all women are the same and all men are the same, and that A is better than B.

Sorry, no. Superiority, like any heirarchy, includes nuance. And as such, the nuance of female superiority includes the possibility that some women just don't measure up.

Of course, that's just an opinion.

Now, about my arrogance. Yes, well, I confess that I have it in abundance. But there's just something about the sort of knee-jerk outrage that just irks me. Also, I have never been comfortable with opinions based on emotional response. Since that is all I read here...and since I saw no one else capable of biting back, I felt compelled.

Finally, the comment about "perfect" vs. "perfectly." Yes, the latter word was used by the comment. But you see, the use of quotes also indicates emphasis...which was my point. Not to directly quote, but to put emphasis on the word perfect as a demonstration of just how silly it was to use that word to describe this kink in the comment's argument.

Good. We all friends now? Wonderful.

Elizabeth said...

Alexis, you are making me like you.

My arguments, found on my blog, make it clear that I find "women" to be superior. Not necessarily you.

What a great line. I'm still laughing.

C'mon, give me this. Give me *this*.

Doesn't the "All women everywhere are superior to me because I'm a worthless male" crap drive you nuts, too?

It has to.

You know that they are using Female Supremacy as their rationalization for that. You know they are. Cheapens only everything.

I guess that's part 2 of 87. (Don't worry, I'm very A.D.D., I'll never get anywhere near a posting in the 80's)

hugs, E

Trinity said...

"Sorry, no. Superiority, like any heirarchy, includes nuance. And as such, the nuance of female superiority includes the possibility that some women just don't measure up."

Okay, but then you're asserting the best of the women are better than the best of the men, and that's still crap. Thanks for trying though, I think we've got a consolation prize somewhere in here...

Eileen said...

Alexis -

Okay, you need to make a distinction between gender and sex. The phrase "female superiority" means anyone who is female is superior. Definition of female, by the way, is anyone with girl bits. That's me, and Elizabeth, and plenty of other people you've never met before.

The phrase "women's superiority" means that anyone who identifies as a woman is superior. And that, yes, that identity is a sliding scale which we each define individually. A scale upon which you may choose or not choose to judge your fellow bloggers. We won't appreciate it, but judge away, as long as you don't do it in a workplace, or take action in a public, non anonymous forum that is regulated by law.

I don't care if you think I'm not a woman - fact of the matter is, I think I am. But I don't think I'm superior. If I don't fit your definitions of superior, that's just fine and dandy, but that also means that we're agreeing to disagree. That means you've decided to allow other opinions and possibilities into the mix, and *that's* what Elizabeth was trying to say. It's all just our opinions, and our private lives.

And I agree with Elizabeth. I mean, come on. Knee jerk reactions on this side are getting pretty high. I'm going to laugh like fucking hell when someone's kneecap gets them in the eye.

maymay said...

So, Alexis, let me see if I understand what you're saying in not so many words: what you're saying is that all women are superior except for the women who aren't superior? So, not all women are superior?

Anonymous said...

Small correction - only a person who has born at least one livng child can be counted as female for the purposes of some medical research and tests. Just having "female parts" isn't good enough.

Eileen said...

Anonymous -
That's fascinating, and not a definition I'm familiar with. Can you link us to some more information about it?

Elizabeth -
Possibly I will stop talking now. Your blog's very popular these days. ;)

Elizabeth said...

A little housekeeping:

Alexis, my last comment was sincere...I'm a sucker for "snappy comebacks". Too much Mad Magazine in the formative years. I love snappy comebacks, even if I don't agree with the POV. They make me happy.

Eileen - talk as much as you like. :) I wouldn't want to distract you from posting on your blog, tho, since I love your posts.

Anon - I'm not sure why I approved your comment through, other than it was so bizarre, it kind of tickled me.

Generally, though, I'm not going to push sheer crazy talk comments through and that one was at least, if that's the last one of yours that goes through, that would be the reason.

Alexis said...


Yes, I confess, the sucky groveling male aggravates me as much as it does you. Yes, it cheapens things. See below for my general opinion of men.


Saying an argument is crap doesn’t make it crap. In any case, I didn’t argue that the best of women were better than the best of men. What I argued is that some women are better than others—you are making the assumption all on your own.

Are you familiar with the difference between potential and kinetic?

My argument is that ALL women are POTENTIALLY superior to males. Except that a great many women allow themselves to be dragged down into nonsensical self-immolation processes, general malaise, accusations and demands for personal approval. My experience is that when women motivate themselves and stop carrying signs which say “gimme what I want” they tend to kick ass, gender-wise.

Not looking for prizes here. Any level of comprehension would be appreciated.


By and large I find males simplistic, easily manipulated and rather pathetic. I am rarely successfully challenged by them except by physical means. Thus, since women challenge me constantly (ie., I must use my brain when I speak with them), I find them superior. The fact that you don’t think you’re superior is perhaps due to your point of view.

Strictly speaking, your definition of female, “anyone with girl bits,” would include me. And everyone else. Biological condition of having gestated in a female incubator. Let’s be a little more distinctive, shall we?

Elizabeth Again:

I did not doubt for a moment that you were sincere.

Eileen said...

Alexis -
Point taken. My definition was unspecific, and such nuances demand specification.


maymay said...

My argument is that ALL women are POTENTIALLY superior to males.

Careful, Alexis. Now your argument has qualifiers. As you are clearly someone who understands the importance of precision in communications, I would hasten to warn you against the use of all-or-nothing statements when qualifiers that, by their definition, add gradation to such statements are clearly essential to what your newly-apparent actual message is.

It is not the fault of the reciever if the transmitter did not send its message correctly.

Alexis said...


Once again. Potential. Kenetic. We're talking about energy here.

ALL rocks have the POTENTIAL to kill you. Including the little itty bitty ones which would give you a blood clot if placed in the right capillary.

This does NOT mean that all rocks WILL kill you. Rocks only present kenetic energy under certain circumstances.

Qualified thought does not equal shoddy.

maymay said...


Qualified thought does not equal shoddy.

It wasn't your thought I was placing into doubt, it was your method of communicating it. I had thought that was made clear, but naturally far be it from me to claim invincibility from such a flaw.

maymay said...

Sorry, Elizabeth. I'll move this off your comments page now. :)

Elizabeth said...

May -

No problem!

I was feeling very Goddess like, everybody else doing the heavy lifting for me.

hugs! E

Dw3t-Hthr said...

I was feeling very Goddess like, everybody else doing the heavy lifting for me.

Well, you did ask people to stand up against the nonsense. It's my experience that most bloggers are happy to have a round of glory on their favorite subjects (by which I mean, of course, a nice, knock-down argument).

Anonymous said...

Read the article "Gender Identity" at Wikipedia, as well as the first citation at the end of the article, and it will become almost obvious why the only (almost) certain method for determining that a person is female in the biological sense is proven motherhood.

Medical tests: I worked in the 1960's in a laboratory doing research in endocrinology. The sex of those who were to be treated was determined by counting Golgi bodies in epidermal cells from the mouth. For control purposes a second slide was always prepared and counted, using cells from a known woman - always someone who certified that she had produced children.

Trinity said...


If I felt like wasting my time, I'd ask you why all men are't potentially superior to all women. I guess we have some sort of gland...

and what does this say about transwomen?

then again: i think I'll move along, you're an utter bore and waste of time.

Colin said...

Alexis said...

By and large I find males simplistic, easily manipulated and rather pathetic. I am rarely successfully challenged by them except by physical means.

For which read: "I got the stuffing beat out of me in high school, and still occasionally get my ass kicked when I look the wrong way at someone. Obviously men are horrible, me being the exception of course."

Elizabeth said...

Where am I in this comment section? I think I've replied to everybody or every post that needed replying to...except, Colin.

Colin, thank you so much. Your comment, not *necessarily* in the exact context of addressing Alexis, turned a big light bulb on for me as I sort through the whole "matriarchy" thing.

Ruminating, thanks. E

Anonymous said...

Hi Im a male sub and I think that the male subs who are into "Female superiority" are one handed typing. Its the masochistic erotisization of skewed power in a relationship as well as the masochistic erotisization of the lack of Dommes. No self-respecting women or Domme wants a Jellyfish. I dont think that many Female supremacists are really Dommes at all and are actually STEALING this sexuality from real Dommes such as some of the ones in this thread.

Anonymous said...

You've nailed it Elizabth - for better or for worse, I have the "submissive kink" -- but it's only a sexual thing. IN the "vanilla" world I'm an Alpha male. The female superiority thing is so silly, but alos demeaning to women in suggesting that they are all alike.

Anonymous said...

Hello :) I realize Female Supremacy is unconventional in every sense of the word and I respect those who do not agree with same. I like to think of myself as liberated from the illusory notions of convention, equalitarianism, social conformity and so on. I think most people who aspire toward an "alternative lifestyle" can—or should—understand those latter sentiments well enough. I do not expect everyone to agree fully with the things I believe in. I'm aware the idea of Female Supremacy is (to some) an evil and absurd concept, but even the boldest objectors must concede Female Supremacy is the beneficiary of certain irrefutable truths, truths written into the hand of Nature itself.

I do not wish to paint the picture of one who embraces this life simply out the desire to rebel against common folkways, however. For those *choosing* to practice Female Supremacy, it is my belief male enslavement to the Female under the doctrine of Female Supremacy should be more common and accepted as a way of life than it is, but our world, though liberated in one sense, remains measured by "polite" social standards. Those men who choose to submit to the authority of a powerful Woman who calls the male creature by its name will know an addictive fulfillment in life like no other.

Female Supremacy is not rooted in misandry, but celebrating and honoring Women as the primary sex. Female Supremacy is a doctrine of harmony between the sexes based on our biological qualities and roles. We do not believe in imposing our way of life upon others in any sense.

I thank you for reading and look forward to hearing and learning about other people's truths.

Below are some links those practicing Female Supremacy take particular interest in. Again, it is up to the individual to follow along the path right for them and their happiness. :)

There are many areas of research that not only validate Female Superiority, but prove it in black-and-white. "Might makes right" has been an idea males have enjoyed using for centuries to justify their influence, but it's also perhaps important to note their status of the stronger sex makes them prone to being sacrificed for labor and war. Again, Warren Farrell's book fleshes that out quite well.

Science is about discovering truths about our universe which can be tested and verified conclusively. Thus far science has revealed that women are genetically more complicated—and complete—than men, as well as less prone to genetic diseases, have more advanced nervous systems, and so on. This is what the objective facts reveal. That is why good science is so wonderful; it is objective.

While science may be full of objective facts, the scientists themselves are not at all passionless robots in their observations or feelings. I will let a few individuals speak for themselves. Take from these snippets what you may.

"Males are wilting away.... From sperm count to social status, and from fertilization to death, as civilization advances those who bear Y chromosomes are in relative decline."

""Oh no!" I can hear you say, "Not superior, but equal, partners, complementary, different, but not superior. What an idea!" Men will mostly smile, while women, alarmed, will rush to the defense of men as women always have and always will."

David Bainbridge
Reproductive Biologist
Author, The Natural Superiority of Women

"Outside the segments devoted to the small tasks of manhood, most of the y is filled with decay. It has degenerated because it abjures the messy business of sex."

"Males are, in many ways, parasites upon their partners. Their interests are to persuade the other party to invest in reproduction, while doing as little as they can themselves."

Steve Jones
Geneticist, Author

Girls, not boys, come out wired for mutual gazing. Girls do not experience the testosterone surge in utero that shrinks the centers for communication, observation and processing of emotion, so their potential to develop skills in these areas are better than boys'."

Louann Brizendine
Neuropsychiatrist, Author

"Originally the Y-chromosome was a perfectly respectable chromosome, but its fate was sealed when it took on the mantle of creating males."

"Are the male trademarks of greed, aggression and promiscuity genetically based?"

Bryan Sykes
Geneticist, Author

The Female has two XX chromsomes, the male has one X chromosome and a smaller Y. The XX more than 1,000 genes and 160 million base pairs of DNA. The Y chromosome - 78 genes, 23 million DNA subunits. Over an extensive period of time, the Y chromosome has been slowly degrading.

In nearly all cases, Mitochondrial DNA (cellular organelles that manufacture and process most of the energy that our cells need to function) are passed matrilineally.

Genetic diseases on average aflfict males more than Females, and baby boys are one-and-a-half to two times more likely to die at birth than girls.

Females mature and develope faster than boys.

The hub for emotion and memory in Females is generally larger than in males. Parts of the frontal lobe, which houses decision-making and problem-solving functions, are proportionally larger in Females, as is the limbic cortex, which regulates emotions.

Females overall have higher lifespans than males.

Men commit a substantially greater amount of violent crime than Women. Of the total number of homicide victims in a 2004 study, 78 percent were male and 22 percent were female. A breakdown of the data by gender showed that 90.1 percent of the offenders were male and 9.9 percent were female.

Overall, Females show better memory retention than males, and boys are clasified as learning disabled at twice the rate of girls.

Of course, there's plenty of factual and empirical observations supporting the collective social and maternal importance of Females, too. But nevermind that for now. I'm curious to know what a scientist has to say about the above statements. If you don't nessessarily feel like refuting them, then I can only conclude you just don't like the subject in general.

By the way, here are some supporitng books worthy of a gander for more information. Nothing refuting the holocaust. I promise. :)

Oh, and Females Are Mosaics is a good read, too.

Regarding the tendency for males to be more prone to genetic diseases: this arises from an error on the X chromosome, which causes disease when there is no corresponding X chromosome with a good gene in a pair. But as we know, men are XY. A man with the bad gene on the X chromosome often gets the disease, as there is no second X chromosome. Women have a second good X chromosome which suppresses the bad X gene, leaving them disease-free, but as carriers. Males cannot be carriers, as they do not have the benefit of protection from a second X.

You can read more about male mortality here, for a start.

No one can deny the male is a derivative of the female template (why do men have nipples?). That is scientific fact. No one can deny Women are more genetically complex than men (XX vs. Xy chromosomes). No one can deny men are more prone to a number of diseases, and Women usually outlive men by an average of seven years. No one can deny Women bear the most vital sexual organs. No one can deny the main hub for emotion and memory formation is usually larger in a woman's brain. No one can deny Women have a higher pain tolerance than men. No one can deny Women generally have better sensory ability than men. No one can deny that on average, Women are healthier than men of their own age.

All the above stands aside of certain social truths that are evident enough if one takes the time. I invite people to read The Myth of Male Power, by Warren Farrell, a former NOW board member, to start.

Links regarding the Female being the original default template:

More updated data indicates that if SRY, the male determinnig gene, does not intervene during a critical window in development, the cells will default to the ovarian pathway. Femaleness results from the absence of any masculinizing genetic factor or hormone acting during the critical period of differentiation. This is why the embryo before sex differentiation is often referred often to as "proto-female".

This is why parthenogenesis is a reproductive option among Females in some parts of the animal world, and possibly ours too, in the near future—but only with the help of technology, as it doesn't ocurr naturally in mammals, I believe.

XX vs. Xy sex differences, Deterentiation, Mitochondrial inheritance, etc. - "There are important genetic differences between the 46,XX and 46,XY karyotypes (Table 4). The most obvious is the striking contrast in the size and known patterns of inheritance of the X and Y chromosomes." - "To date, there is no convincing evidence that an ovarian differentiation factor exists."

Discordant genetic Identity in males, male reversed-sex mutations, ect.

Aging differences between males and females (longer female lifespan) - "Human beings are living longer, women more so than men. Among people 85 years of age and older, there are 4 men for every 10 women."

Females Are Mosaics (previously recommended in this thread)

"In Females Are Mosaics, Barbara Migeon makes a very strong case that women are superior to men in coping with disease and the environment. This is because they have two types of cells in all their organs, each with one of the two X chromosomes genetically active and the other essentially silent." —NEJM

Thank you for taking the time to read.

Peace and Blessings,

Mistress Dolly, Female Supremacist