That’s not my theory. That’s the data.
One interpretation could be that women were constantly engaged in strenuous endurance activities and so through evolution built up tolerances against exhaustion that at least rivals if not exceeds that of men. And one historical activity that used a lot of stamina and took a lot of tolerance against fatigue was the way in which ancient humans hunted.
That’s not what a theory is, it’s a hypothesis at best, hope that helped.
Women were first allowed to compete in marathons in 1972. In 1972 the men’s record was 2:10:30. The current record is 2:00:35 which is about an 8% difference. Pretty close to the difference between men and women currently.
The first women’s record was 3:40:22 and the current women’s record is 2:11:53.11 which is 40% faster.
Once funding for women’s athletics reaches parity and once girls are encouraged into athletics as much as boys, then we will see if the ladies catch up. So far they’re doing a pretty good job catching up, and you can’t look at one current window in time and say you have the answer, you need to look at trends.
Evidence shows that women have better endurance for long distances. They tend to be less susceptible to fatigue and beyond 195 miles are actually faster than men. Considering humans were better at outlasting their prey and chasing them to exhaustion rather than burst speed, this data indicates that women are at least as capable as men at those tasks if not better.
You don’t call a lion immoral because lions can’t comprehend morality. That doesn’t mean that humans can do the same actions without being judged morally. Lions can also kill other lions which would be more comparable to murder than your hunting example and still they wouldn’t be held morally responsible and yet humans would if they killed another human. A lot of animals rape too, doesn’t mean it’s moral for humans to do.
The difference is that we CAN understand morality which is why we are held to moral standards and animals aren’t. This is like, pretty basic stuff and shouldn’t be at all confusing. Maybe read a book or two before having loud opinions?
These mitts were made for murderin and that’s just what they’ll do
I look forward to lunch every day. I make myself a wrap with some sort of oven cooked filling and a bunch of fresh veggies and some apple slices and a small bag of wasabi peas for dessert.
Don’t worry, one day you’ll get to grow up and complain about the next generation behaving in the exact same way! Kids these days, amirite?
I don’t really have an answer to that, it is an interesting question. For me personally I don’t hold any attachment or feelings to the bodies of the deceased. When I die I’m getting one of those mushroom suits that decomposes you and quickly returns you to nature. But some people are much more attached to the bodies of the deceased whether for spiritual reasons or otherwise and I can’t really speak for them. Would eating the euthanized pets cause suffering to their previous owners, I really have no answer for that, I assume there would be some people who would suffer from that and some who wouldn’t mind. The quality of the meat I think would be very low though considering it would mostly be very senior animals with many health issues.
Maybe you’re joking but I have seen people say this seriously so I’ll respond seriously. Determining which conscious beings to inflict pain and suffering onto based on characteristics they were born with through no choice of their own is pretty shitty.
It’s not sort of like that though because the practicality of the matter is that humans have to eat to survive but they don’t have to genocide to survive. Reducing suffering as much as possible being the goal rather than eliminating it completely is not a new concept in philosophy considering eliminating suffering completely is impossible.
What do you mean ‘now’? Even 4chan had to remove illegal things, this isn’t new.
You might want to talk to a therapist because that is not a “cultural” difference.
But if you don’t care that other people around you think you’re an asshole even if they’re not coming up to you and saying it, then there’s nothing anyone can say.
That use to happen to me a lot, but I haven’t felt that pain in a long time. I started doing yoga regularly which helps, but even without doing yoga, a lesson I learned from yoga prevents that situation in other cases. It’s about balance, so when you stretch your feet down, don’t stretch your feet down toe first, there is no balance there, stretch your legs down heel first, that way the back muscle is being pulled down and the front muscle is being pulled up with your toe, the two counteract each other and you will not get this cramping.
Seek balance in all things friends, including your muscles while you stretch.
Because they’re supposed to be responsible to and represent the people who voted for them. Irrelevant to this situation.
It’s different because there might be some people who you always end up downvoting their comments and you don’t even realize it’s the same person because you don’t look at user names and there aren’t really that many prolific commenters here so they will see that you’re always downvoting them and assume malice in a way that they wouldn’t otherwise because they’re not going through your comments, they’re only looking at theirs.
For example, this comment just a few down:
I’m mildly curious if the single down vote I get on ~70% of my comments is from like one guy I pissed off at some point. At the same time I don’t care enough to work around the system, so maybe it works?
They immediately assume that if one person is downvoting them it is malice instead of maybe that one person just disagrees with their comments for other reasons and isn’t even looking at user names.
Edit: I just noticed you did the same thing in your comment too. There are not that many users here, just because someone is consistently downvoting your comments doesn’t mean they are following you around, there isn’t a lot of content and people who spend time here see a lot of it. Maybe they just disagree with every comment you make that they happen to see and have no idea or care who you are.
Technology-wise, most modern “analog” wristwatches are quartz, and therefore digital, not actually analog.
Wat… that’s not how that works. Quartz watches can be digital or analog but what matters is whether it has a digital display or analog hands.
I’m a watch nerd with a collection of mechanical watches and I’m not going to downvote you because you’re right. I wear them because I like them even though I know they are anachronistic. I can’t remember the last time I interacted with somebody significantly younger than me who was wearing a watch, and as I said, I’m a watch nerd, someone’s watch is one of the first things I notice about them.
I will say that they are occasionally more convenient than other places I could check the time but I’ve built my life in such a way that I very rarely have to care about what time it is and I go weeks at a time without checking the time, just wearing them because I’m fascinated by tiny gears and springs doing their business and I like the feeling of it on my wrist.
You’re thinking about ‘general AI’
Just plain old AI includes the ability to analyze data and make recommendations which this is. Therefore this falls under the broad definition of AI.
I’m lawful neutral until the clip breaks, which it always does, and then I go chaotic neutral.