Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Definition of Masculinity and Definition of Femininity

It's been a long time since I wrote here, and to tell you the truth, I know that you don't always want to listen to different sentences, but nevertheless, I decided to include today the true definition of masculinity and the definition of femininity.


The best definition of masculinity I have ever heard was given by General George Patton before the Normandy invasion on June 6, 1944.

Here is a quote from the entire "God of War" speech to American soldiers of June 5, 1944:


"All the talk that America doesn't want to go on and fight this war is a lot of fucking crap. Our whole tradition shows that we are always ready to fight. All true Americans love this shot of excitement and the clash with the enemy.

You are here today for three reasons: because you want to defend your homes and loved ones, because you respect yourself, because you did not want to be elsewhere, and finally because you are real men. Real men like to fight.

As kids, you all admired the champion of marbles, the fastest runner, the toughest boxer, the best baseball players and footballers. Americans love winners, hate losers, and despise cowards. We always play to win.

I don't give a shit about a guy who lost and was still laughing. That is why the Americans have never lost and will not lose the war - we hate the mere thought of defeat. You will not all die. Perhaps 2% of those here today will die in a major battle. Do not be afraid of death, in its time it will come for every human being.

It is true that everyone is afraid of fighting, the one who denies is a liar. Some people, even with a soul on their shoulder, can fight like the bravest. To hell, they can do their best when they see what kind of heart others, equally scared, are fighting with.

A true hero is one who fights even when he feels fear. Some feel fear in the first minute of a fight, some after three hours, some all day long, but a real man will never let his fear take over his sense of honor, duty to the country, and inner male strength.

Fighting is the most wonderful type of competition that a human can participate in. It brings out the best in us and frees us from the low and wicked. Americans are proud to be masculine and I tell you they are really brave. Remember that the enemy feels as much fear as you do, and maybe even more so - they are not superhumans.

Throughout your military service, you have a psyche about what you call "painful drill." Like everything else in the military, it has a specific purpose - vigilance. Everyone must have it in them. A guy who can't be constantly vigilant and attentive is worth shit.

You are veterans or you would not be here. You are ready for what is to come, if you want to survive, you must remain vigilant at all times. If she's gone, eventually some German motherfucker will sneak up on you from behind and kill you with anything.

There are four hundred carefully marked graves in one place in Sicily, they are there only because one of the soldiers lying in it has gone to sleep on duty. But these are the graves of the Germans because we surprised the motherfucker in her sleep before they caught him themselves.

The army is one team - it lives, sleeps, eats and fights together. Talking about individual heroism is a lot of nonsense. Those pathetic dicks who fry the Saturday Evening Post articles on this subject know no more about real fireline fighting than they do about fucking themselves.

We have the best equipment and the best food. The greatest fighting spirit and the best soldiers in the world. My God, I even feel sorry for those poor motherfuckers who will face us. For God's sake, I really feel sorry for those bastards.

The men don't give up! I don't want to hear that a soldier fighting under my command has been taken prisoner - unless he was shot in combat. But even if they shoot you, you can still return fire.

And I'm not talking nonsense here. Under my command, I want people like the lieutenant I met during the fighting in Libya. The moment the German pressed a Luger to his chest, he tore off his helmet, knocked off the hand with the pistol and hit the German so hard that it fell flat. Then the lieutenant jumped up, grabbed the gun from him and killed another German before they realized what the hell was going on. And all this time he had a bullet in his lung - this is a real man.

Real heroes are not legendary fairy-tale characters for good children. Everyone in this army has a key role to play. Never give up your efforts, don't weaken your will, let no one think that his work is not important. Everyone has a job to do and must do it.

You are all links in a great chain. What if every truck driver suddenly decided he was fed up with the whistling bullets above his head, turned yellow with terror, and ran straight into the ditch? A cowardly son of a bitch would then say, "To hell with all of this, they won't pity me anyway, I'm just one of many thousands." But if everyone was thinking that, where the hell would we be today? What would our country, our loved ones, our homes and even the whole world look like?

Not the hell! Americans don't think that way, everyone has their job, everyone serves everyone and the greater whole. Every squad and every unit has a place in the grand scheme of this war. Logistics people are needed to supply us with weapons. Thanks to them, we can fight. The Quartermaster is important because he provides food and uniforms. Everyone who works in the field kitchens has a job to do, even those who only boil water so that we don't get a diarrhea.

Let no one think only about himself, let him pay attention to the fighting next to his friend. We don't want pathetic cowards in this army, they should be exterminated - like rats, because if not, they will return home after the war and breed more people like that. Courageous men will breed even more courageous men. Let's kill goddamn cowards and we'll have a nation of brave people.

Let me give you an example of one of the bravest soldiers I have ever met. It was during the fighting in Tunisia. During a fierce exchange of fire, the bullets hissed overhead, the soldier sitting on a telegraph pole. I ask him, what the hell is he doing there at a time like this? "I'm repairing telegraph wires, General," he screams. Is it wise, right now? And he replies: "You're right, General, but these damn wires need to be repaired." "And don't you mind planes shooting at the road?", "Hell, not general - the job has to be done."

Here is a real man, a real soldier. This man did everything to fulfill his task, despite the great probability that he would die. It's a pity you didn't see these trucks on the roads in Tunisia. Our wonderful drivers, day and night, pushed along these sacramental roads, without any breaks, without deviating from the course, although all the time bullets and bombs exploded overhead.

We achieved our goal thanks to the courage for which Americans have been famous for centuries. Some of these drivers have been driving for over 40 consecutive hours. These were not people directly involved in the fight, but ordinary soldiers doing their job - and how did they do it? Hell, great. They were part of one team. Without their efforts, we would have lost the battle without them. When all the links in the chain are held tight, nothing will ever break it.

Remember, you don't know I'm here, no mention of me in the letters. The world is not supposed to know what the hell happened to me. I'm not in charge of this army, I'm not even in the army. Let the first bastards to find out about it be those bloody Germans. I want to see them leap to their feet and pee in fear, yelling "Jesus Christ, it's that goddamn 3rd Army again and that motherfucker Patton.

We're going to start hell here. The sooner we deal with this fucking mess, the sooner we can make a little raid on the Japanese and deal with those bastards in their cave before all the merit goes to the Marines.

Of course we want to go home, we want this war to end. The quickest way to do that is to get the bastards who started it. The sooner we dig, the sooner we return to the country. The easiest way to get there is through Berlin and Tokyo, and as soon as we take Berlin, I'll personally shoot this bastard, Hitler's wall-paper maker. Just like a snake is killed.

When a man lies in a shooting trench all day, the Germans will eventually get him there. To hell with it. My people won't dig any ditches or pits, I don't want them to do it. It only slows down the offensive. Be constantly on the attack, do not cease, do not give the enemy time to build ramparts.

We will win this war, but only by showing the Germans that we have more courage than they have or will ever have. Not only are we going to shoot every one of these motherfuckers, we are also gutting them and using them to lubricate the tracks of our tanks. We'll finish off those dicks and Huns - all of them!

War is bloody bloody and murderous business. We must shed their blood before they shed ours. Rip their bellies open, shoot them in the guts. When the bullets whistle around and you wipe the dust off your face, you will suddenly realize that it is not a dirt, but the blood and guts of a man who was once your best friend - you will know what to do.

I don't want any reports like "We hold our positions". We don't keep anything to the hell, let the Germans do it. Let's keep pushing forward. Only the constant pursuit of the enemy, let's grab his balls, let's squeeze them so that he will shit with pain. Our basic operating plan is to keep going and moving forward. All the time and without a break. We'll go through the krauts as smooth as shit through a goose.

From time to time, there are complaints that we tighten the screw on our people. But I don't fucking care. I believe in the good old rule: "A little sweat will save the gallons of blood." The harder we press, the more Germans we kill, the more we kill them - the less of ours will die. So tightening the screw means fewer unnecessary casualties. I want you all to remember this.

After you return home from this war, you will be able to say one big thing. In twenty years, you will be sitting by the fireplace with your grandson on your lap, and when he asks, "What were you doing during the Great World War II?", "Phew, well, I was shoveling dung in Louisiana." ". No, gentlemen - you'll be able to look him in the eye and say, "Listen, son, your grandfather served in a great 3rd Army, under the command of that goddamn George Patton bastard."

Amazing - isn't it !?

"The penultimate God of War": George Patton (Patton 1970):

As for femininity, the best definition of it will be the beauty shown during miss competitions, especially female students - like here: Miss Lodz University of Technology (Central Poland) from 2013:

To sum up: masculinity is strength, responsibility and efficiency (also protection of the weaker, especially women), while femininity is beauty, delicacy and ... submission.

Thank you for your attention.
A very thought provoking post, Aurelianus.

All I can say is, if that’s the definition of masculinity, I’m glad I identify as a woman. It was of course necessary to approach life in such a manner in the context of the war raging at the time it was spoken, but I can’t help thinking that the good general might have overlooked the fact that it was broadly masculine traits that started such wars in the first place; certainly such radical examples of masculinity have no place in the world today - and I’m grateful that the world is so much less binary today with both genders encouraged to show a little more balance in their personalities.
(07-22-2020, 10:06 PM)AURELIANUS81 Wrote: Hmmmm

Men, Responsibility?
Over 80% of prison inmates in every country in the world, are men.
Over 90% of all burglars in the world are men.
Over 95% of all the people who refuse to stop for police vehicles and end up in a car pursuit are men.

Women, submission? Hmmmm

I think the only accurate definition of masculinity is, XY chromosomes and of women, XX chromosomes.

Mistress Scarlet
(07-23-2020, 10:47 AM)Mistress Scarlet Wrote:
(07-22-2020, 10:06 PM)AURELIANUS81 Wrote: Hmmmm

Men, Responsibility?
Over 80% of prison inmates in every country in the world, are men.
Over 90% of all burglars in the world are men.
Over 95% of all the people who refuse to stop for police vehicles and end up in a car pursuit are men.

Women, submission? Hmmmm

I think the only accurate definition of masculinity is, XY chromosomes and of women, XX chromosomes.

Mistress Scarlet
I took it to mean responsibility in terms of what society expected of them rather than necessarily what males actually produce. Men were typically expected to be the breadwinner up until very recently (some would argue it is still the case). The fact that modern men don’t necessarily always live up to that expectation doesn’t mean it isn’t (or wasn’t) there.
Although George S. Patton was undoubtedly a great general I cannot agree that he was a great example of masculinity.

Lt. Gen. George S. Patton, commander of the Seventh U.S. Army, visited a military hospital in Sicily on Aug. 3, 1943. He traveled past the beds of wounded soldiers, asking them about their injuries. Coming to the bed of a soldier who lacked visible signs of injury, Patton inquired about his health.

The soldier, 18-year-old Pvt. Charles H. Kuhl, had been tentatively diagnosed as having a case of psychoneurosis. He told Patton that he couldn’t mentally handle the battle lines. “It’s my nerves,” he said. “I can hear the shells come over but I can’t hear them burst.”

Enraged, Patton slapped Kuhl across the face and called him a coward. As Patton left the tent, he heard Kuhl crying and turned back, striking the soldier again and ordering him to leave the infirmary tent. It later emerged that Kuhl had malaria and a high fever. 

A week later, in a far less publicized incident, Patton slapped Pvt. Paul G. Bennet, who had been hospitalized for his “nerves.” News of both incidents reached Gen. Dwight Eisenhower, who on Aug. 17 sent a letter to Patton reprimanding him.

“I am well aware of the necessity for hardness and toughness on the battle field. … But this does not excuse brutality, abuse of the ‘sick,’ nor exhibition of uncontrollable temper in front of subordinates,” Eisenhower wrote.

Eisenhower ordered Patton to apologize to the men, but, feeling that he was too valuable a leader to lose, allowed to retain his command. Months later, on Nov. 21, radio broadcaster Drew Pearson revealed to U.S. audiences that Patton had slapped Kuhl. Many members of Congress and the press called for Patton’s removal from command, and outrage over the alleged “cover-up” was also widespread.

The Senate delayed Patton’s confirmation as major general and Eisenhower relieved him of his command of the Seventh Army. He would go on to serve as a decoy during the invasion of Normandy and be given command of the Third Army, which he brilliantly led in an Allied victory in the Battle of the Bulge. 

The words of Eisenhower, " “I am well aware of the necessity for hardness and toughness on the battle field. … But this does not excuse brutality, abuse of the ‘sick,’ nor exhibition of uncontrollable temper in front of subordinates,” show to me an example of masculinity I could admire!
I suspected as much, Davidps 

Sounds like behind it all he was a bit of a bully really. The thing with masculinity is that, while it has its uses in certain occupations and in certain areas of life, it is misused far too often. The very fact the world had a need for such generals stemmed from masculinity having got out of hand. Still today there are a lot of people who clearly cannot handle the responsibilities of masculinity and were it ever to go wrong again to the extent that it did back then, the weapons we have today would have far more volatile consequences.

The world therefore needs to tend towards femininity and I have always been of the hope that as a society, femininity could be our base level with masculine traits and roles open for those who pass personality tests (just as one would pass a driving test now or graduate from high school).

I long ago put together a hypothesis which would involve all students starting out in dresses. Through learning how to dress and act like a girl of an appropriate age they would ‘graduate’ to skirts.

In order to pass this stage the students would have to learn how to act and dress much as a teenage girl might today (navigating high heels, applying makeup, assessing appropriate skirt length for an occasion). Only once they had learned how to be girls would they get the right to wear trousers associated with masculinity.

I appreciate of course that the likelihood of a government legislating a development programme to such an extent would be quite slim, but surely much more realistic is a gender studies class. Just as girls (and boys) have to wear sports kits and play football, dodgeball etc once or twice a week, girls would have lessons in how to wear male clothes and do male activities for an hour or two a week while boys would learn how to wear a skirt, apply makeup and walk in high heels for an hour or two a week.

For the sake of humanity’s future, gender norms need to go and masculinity in particular needs regulation.
Girlygirl - I understand you're a woman, otherwise I can't imagine how you could "identify yourself as a woman"?

Girlygirl - you write: "certainly such radical examples of masculinity have no place in the world today". Well, such radical examples of masculinity are timeless. The problem is that nowadays we live in such a messed up world, in which masculinity and men are considered to be the greatest evil that ever existed in the world. I will try to develop this topic a little further.

Mistress Scarlet - Among men, there are most geniuses as well as criminals. Most heroes and defenders, as well as sadists and deviants, most science men and psychopaths. Someone once said: Why isn't there an Einstein woman? For the same reasons there was no Jack the Ripper's woman. All the progress of the world is made with male hands and male intellects among the streams of blood, dirt and sperm, and at the same time among such values as responsibility, determination and protection.

The problem is that nowadays young men often do not have the right role models to follow. Families are often broken up, fathers are either in jail or gone or dead (especially in black families, but not only). What kind of patterns does such a young man have to follow? So most frequently he or she repeats the role models of his or her peers (who also often were brought up in broken families or in such a place where violence prevailed). So there are drugs, guns, first crimes, rapes, murders, and then you go to prison for years and your life passes.

Young men cannot find themselves in the world because their fathers did not give them an example of what they should do in life and how to act as men. And being a man is both ennoblement and responsibility.

Above all, masculinity is based on sacrifice for the weaker (women and children), on determination and consequences in a task once started. Men do not give up, men fight to the end. Men do not cry, but seek a solution to a difficult situation (because when a man cries, it really must be the end of the world). Who teaches this young man these days? School? Family? No, nobody teaches them, because their parents were not taught it anymore and they don't know these values.

Another thing is that modern feminism is a big problem, which confuses young women (and unfortunately women are much more susceptible to manipulation than men and are easier to cheat).

I don't want to write about what feminism is and where it comes from (I'll just remind you that it is an unfortunate child of marxism, just like communism, bolshevism, nazism, fascism, genderism and lgbt ideology). However, it should be remembered that feminism was invented by men in order to effectively steer women in a chosen direction.  

What are action of Femen's if not the degradation of women and femininity, where young girls with naked breasts and painted slogans on their own bodies are no longer even reduced to sexual objects, but to animals or rags. And they think that's how they fight for "women's rights". This shows how easy it is to control people by telling them that they can do something good for women, for the planet or for the climate.

So in today's world there is a lack of courage and men. But there is also a lack of women who would respect their own body and, above all, respect men.

Davidps - As far as Patton is concerned, the news of his progress is well known. He was forced to apologize to this soldier and only then could he take command of the next 3rd Army. But this is an example of a civilization created by men and not by barbarians - which protects even the weak from the wilful of the strong.

I don't know if you know, but in the Soviet Union the local general (and later USSR Marshal) Gieorgiy Zhukov ordered his wounded soldiers to be crushed by tanks, only to be able to conquer Berlin by May 1, 1945, and thus make Commander Joseph Stalin happy. And this is the huge difference in the approach to justice, as Zhukov became a great hero (even though Berlin fell as late as May 2). These are two examples of valor, one was based on the principles of law and respect for human life, and the other was created by sons of bitches (as beautifully summarized by Patton in his 1970 film).

And so privately, it is I who value not only gen. George Patton "The penultimate God of War", but also General Douglas MacArthur "The Last God of War", who in 1943-1945 ended the war with Japan and in 1950 kicked the asses of communists Kim Ir Sen at the Battle of Inchon, making a bold landing and broke the whole North Korean front there (by the way, in these two leaders the history of American unity was accumulated as if in a lens, because Patton was a descendant of a Confederate soldier, and MacArthur was a descendant of a Union soldier. And during the US war with Spain in 1898, military bands played both South and North marches, to integrate the still broken nation faster. And today leftism is destroying American streets and overthrowing statues of heroes).

Finally, I would like to add that the maneuver performed by MacArthur at Inczhon in 1950 was a repetition of the attack on the Red Army from the Wieprz River in 1920 during the Polish-Bolshevik war, carried out by Józef Piłsudski, Polish Marshal.

And one more thing. In 1932, MacArthur left for Poland at the request of US President Herbert Hoover to meet Marshal Józef Piłsudski (whom MacArthur admired and considered "the greatest leader in the history of the world since Napoleon"). Then the American delegation received an unusual gift that helped them in their fight against the Soviets long after the end of World War II. Namely, they received the first decoded codes of the German encryption machine "Enigma" (Poles decoded Enigma already in December 1932 and handed the codes to the British in 1939, which made their task easier in the fight against the Germans. So it was not the English who deciphered Enigma, how wrongly mentions, for example, the movie "Enigma" from 2001, only three Polish mathematicians from the Cipher Bureau of the General Staff of the Polish Army - Marian Rejewski, Jerzy Różycki and Henryk Zygalski). The Americans also received then the super secret codes of the Soviet army: "Revolution" and "Fiałka", which the Soviets used until ... 1954 without knowing that they had been broken.

If any of you would like to read more on this topic, please visit my blog:

Later, Stalin took his revenge for the defeat with Poland in 1920 (for example, I do not mention the forced deportations to Siberia, where people could take only one suitcase of necessary things and where they often traveled in cattle cars for several days, and then they were dropped off in the snow knee-deep in the middle of the field - and other Soviet murders of Poles), ordering the execution of over 22,000 Polish officers and policemen in Katyn in 1940 (there was also one woman - Lieutenant Pilot Janina Lewandowska) with a shot in the back of the head. It is also an example of barbaric strengthened by the anti-human communist ideology.

Thank you for your attention.
I enjoyed your history lesson, Aurelianus.

I would agree that for a variety of reasons, the family unit in many cases is not what it would have been one hundred years ago. I do however think that it is time to let go of traditional gender models and we shouldn’t try and recreate masculinity based on how it used to exist (particularly given the immense amount of problems that went along with it - such as I described).

I would be interested in your issue with feminism; as I understand it, it is a movement to promote the interests of women from a perceived state of inequality (historically seen in voting rights and dress requirement and today seen still in many cases in wage disparity). Far from resulting in them disrespecting their bodies, girls and women today feel more empowered to make their own decisions rather than simply act at the behest of a man (and who are they anyway to advise how a woman should act or dress)? 

We should be promoting a society that presents equal opportunities, where women can be engineers without fear of bias and where men can work in hair & beauty - wearing skirts and high heels if he so chooses - without fear and ridicule. Of course there is still the need for leadership as we still have the need for followers but the idea that there should be an underlying gender basis for this is one that we should be consigning to history.

FWIW, I am a genetic male but work as an air hostess (in the traditional skirts, heels and makeup that traditionally accompany the role) as I feel at home in these clothes and in this role (I actually identify as a ‘Born Again Female’ but thought I would keep it simple for the benefit of this discussion). I understand women (as do other Male posters who conform to feminisation on this forum) understand women to a far greater extent than the male archetype you describe from the past could ever hope to have done.
Girlygirl, I agree with you here. There should be no reason that we cannot have female engineers or scientists. While I am genetically male and live life as a male, I am an engineer by profession and I enjoy the female colleagues I have and their intelligence that makes them a worthwhile contributor to the profession. We have already had a number of great female scientists--Madame Curie is a great example. The idea that all the progress in this world is made by the intellect and hands of males is ridiculous and is a position borne out of ignorance.

I have been a happily married man for what will be 28 years next month. It's never been perfect, but it's been a solid marriage. Why? Not only is she my best friend, but she is my equal. While I have the intelligence required to get the college degree in engineering and excel in a tough field, that does not lessen her impact on our marriage. Even with all my intellect, she has wonderful ideas and can see situations from a different perspective. More than once I have told her she was a genius for thinking of solutions I never thought about.

Oh, BTW, the person who does hair for my wife, daughter, and I? He's a man. I just need the pandemic to slow down so I can get in to get my hair cut, I haven't been able to get it done for five months!
First on Patton

The U.S. Army’s mission in Germany was to govern and start rebuilding a former enemy nation, a country gutted by its war machine and deflated by its surrender. Part of the task, President Harry Truman and Eisenhower agreed, was to “denazify” the country, which meant re-education, the fostering of democratic institutions and the punishment of Nazi war criminals to set an example for the would-be Hitlers of the future. Patton was astonishingly indifferent to this mission. He spent much of his time writing his wartime memoirs, hunting and fishing with subordinates, and riding in the countryside with his groom, Baron von Wangenheim, an Olympian equestrian and die-hard Nazi whom remnants of the SS had implanted in Patton’s staff to keep an eye on him and feed his lust for a war against the Soviet Union.
It was hard enough to get the streets cleared and keep Germans from starving to death; Patton wasn’t interested in denazification or creating a lesson for future tyrants. He thought it was “madness” to imprison Nazis, good soldiers who were much more valuable as future allies against the Soviets than the Jewish survivors he was charged with protecting and feeding.
Disturbingly, Patton had zero sympathy for the Holocaust victims living in wretched, overcrowded collection camps under his command. He was unable to imagine that people living in such misery were not there because of their own flaws. The displaced Jews were “locusts,” “lower than animals,” “lost to all decency.” They were “a subhuman species without any of the cultural or social refinements of our times,” Patton wrote in his diary. A United Nations aid worker tried to explain that they were traumatized, but “personally I doubt it. I have never looked at a group of people who seem to be more lacking in intelligence and spirit.” (Patton was no friend to Arabs, either; in a 1943 letter, he called them “the mixture of all the bad races on earth.”)
The orders from above—Eisenhower wanted him to confiscate the houses of wealthy Germans so Jewish survivors could live in them—embittered Patton. His beloved Third Army was decaying as troops decamped for home, discipline vanished, and meanwhile, “the displaced sons-of-bitches in the various camps are blooming like green trees,” he wrote a friend.
He saw journalists’ criticism of his handling of the Jews and the return of Nazis to high official positions as a result of Jewish and Communist plots. The New York Times and other publications were “trying to do two things,” he wrote, “First, implement Communism, and second, see that all business men of German ancestry and non-Jewish antecedents are thrown out of their jobs.”
As reports on the conditions in Bavaria began to alarm Truman, Eisenhower came down from Frankfurt on September 17 to join Patton on a tour of the camps where Jewish refugees were housed. He was horrified to find that some of the guards were former SS men. During the tour, Patton remarked that the camps had been clean and decent before the arrival of the Jewish “DPs” (displaced persons), who were “pissing and crapping all over the place.” Eisenhower told Patton to shut up, but he continued his diatribe, telling Eisenhower he planned to make a nearby German village “a concentration camp for some of these goddam Jews.”
While Eisenhower ordered him to stop “mollycoddling Nazis,” Patton lashed out at journalists and others he viewed as enemies. “The noise against me is only the means by which the Jews and Communists are attempting and with good success to implement a further dismemberment of Germany,” he said.
Patton’s callousness, anti-Antisemitism and indifference to the job of re-education were bad enough, but what really worried Eisenhower and Truman was Patton’s desire to start another war. The Soviet Union had been a close U.S. ally against the Nazis, but Patton was an early, fervent anti-Communist who loathed “Genghis Khan’s degenerate descendants” and felt Roosevelt had surrendered too much European turf to the Russians. He was obsessed with pushing them back out of Germany.
After bugging his office and phone, Eisenhower’s aides heard him discussing ways to gin up a war to drive out the Russians “with the help of the German troops we have.” The Germans, Patton said, were “the only decent people left in Europe.”
On September 25, Eisenhower removed him from his command. During their last showdown, Patton admitted faults but said his greatest virtue was his honesty and lack of ulterior motive. Ike responded that Patton’s greatest virtue and his greatest fault was his audacity.
His accidental death three months later may have been a blessing to Patton’s historical image, since it kept him from becoming just another one of America’s fanatical McCarthyites, the conspiratorial anti-Communists who tangled the country up in witch hunts for a decade after the war.

On Women

By Debora Mackenzie
Why are there so few female Einsteins? Many people share a belief that while women can do science, there are far fewer women than men at the very top of the science hierarchy because women just aren’t as innately good at science as men. Others feel this view is wrong but cannot easily put their finger on why.
They should be able to now. There are few women at the top of science because there are so few women in science. It’s simple statistics.
The absence of women at the top in scientific endeavour is real. There is not one woman in New Scientist‘s list of scientific heroes for 2008, for example. And in chess, which is arguably as intellectually rigorous, there has never been a female champion, and fewer than 1% of grandmasters are women.
But chess has something science doesn’t: a clear ranking system based on performance in competitions from school age up. Using the records of the German chess federation, Merim Bilalic of the University of Oxford and colleagues found that statistics can explain the absence of women at the top. “More extreme values are found in larger populations,” she says.
Those rare exceptions
Individuals at the top are, by definition, rare. In two groups with the same average performance and variability, the larger group is simply more likely to have more of these rare individuals, just because it is larger. The greater the difference in group size, the greater the chance the bigger group will have more exceptional individuals.
To test this idea, Bilalic’s team checked the records of the German chess federation – in which males outnumbered females 16 to one. They found that the statistical effect of this difference in numbers accounted for 96% of the observed difference in performance between the sexes. “There is little left for biological differences to explain,” says Bilalic.
While statistics may explains the absence of females at the top, they don’t explain why there are fewer females in the first place. If this is due to any innate differences in chess ability between the sexes it would have to influence whether children start to play the game at all, because the dropout rates for girls and boys once they do start are similar.
Many other factors might keep girls from ever getting into chess, such as cultural expectations, the difficulty of breaking into an activity dominated by boys, or just having been told they’re less good at it. “But you can no longer cite the greater number of men among the most successful people as evidence of innate differences until the effects of participation rates have been allowed for,” says Bilalic.

In short, it’s hardly surprising that there are so few women Einsteins when there are so few male ones – and so many more men are trying.

Journal reference: Proceedings of the Royal Society, DOI:10.1098/rspb.2008.1576

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

About Petticoat Discipline Quarterly

Focus MyBB Theme is designed for MyBB 1.8 series and is tested properly till the most current version of MyBB i.e. 1.8.7. It is simple, clean and light MyBB theme with use of font-awesome icons and shrinking header.

For any more information, please use our contact form.

              User Links