Debate: I Don't Understand Feminists... Men Are Dominant.
Side: Men Are

I just want to start with this point, because while so much of your post proved that you had no science or, you know, sense, backing you up, this one is just glaring. The distinct mentality that girls like different things, as evidenced by them liking pink, is a load of crap. Up until WW2, blue was considered to be a girly color, while pink was masculine. Only reason that changed was HitlerThis is a load of crap and was found out to be a mythSo not only do you not understand sex, gender, and biology, but you also don't understand business. Self-made means a company you created, it doesn't not mean society had no effect on you. Unless you are independently wealthy to begin with, most businesses, especially those that will rake in millions, have investors. Investors, in the current US society, dislike working with women and do like sexually harassing them. As I said in my first post.I am sorry to say that it is you who doesn't understand business: if something seems highly profitable, investors will invest regardless of gender. In business, all people care about is money. So if you show proof of concept that will likely make the investors lots of money, they will invest. (Perhaps it is mentality like this that keep women from such success?)Also, men are likely to take more risks- and becoming highly successful involves a lot of risks.This is a load of bull.Sure women are better decision makers under stress, but men ted to think long term whereas women tend to think in short terms (albeit well thought out). Though, this article seems to be partial- which is understandable since America wishes to empower women, as equality is the new agenda (take Hillary Clinton and Obama, for example).Of course I negate it. It's not a fact, and it's not true.Again, you women openly express how subdominant you are, I used your male preferences as an illustration of so (liking men with more money than you, liking men stronger than you, liking men who are more dominant than others, and liking men with a dominant patina (i.e. social dominance). Even with sex, most women have shown to prefer 'doggy style' and missionary (both completely submissive positions) - why? Because women love to be dominated (hence the pleasure derived from being half choked).You can negate the pragmatic dominant view (esp. with female preferences), but... that is up to you.Really? Science isn't good enough for you? In society today, we have the choice on whether or not to reproduce [...]I was speaking in terms of a logical progression with biopsyhological traits. If these traits are predisposed, one cannot simply detach from it- which is why I used the homosexuality example. Homosexuality is a predisposition, therefore rendering it uncontrollable (at least with modern science).Your point about reproduction addresses something completely irrespective of my point. You are speaking in terms of controlling actions, and I am speaking in terms of psyche that would render their actions resulting from so. If women instinctively function to be subdominant with the male being the opposite, then society would persists with such construct given the natural laws regarding psychology. A homosexual has a psyche comprised of attraction towards the same sex, this psychological makeup would obviously compel them to search for a same-sex mate. Sure, they can bypass the action of the search, but not the want of the search. This applies to women seeking the type of men aforementioned. They want dominant men (but of course there is always a select few women who seek submissive men).Why do you think women find it unattractive for men to be subdominant? Its entirely instinctual and can be explained through evolution.Men are also more dominant given their higher testosterone levels. And studies have shown that, when you give women more testosterone, their aggressiveness and their will to be dominant becomes increases. So you can negate science all you wish, but again, that's on you..