Languish.org

General Category => Off the Record => Topic started by: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 01:21:22 PM

Title: Women > men
Post by: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 01:21:22 PM
At least when it comes to plumbing.

I went to a Thai massage. Turned out the masseur was male, and a cute one too. Took a lot of thinkng about fat women with dripping vaginas to keep things under control especially when I was on my back. You chicks do not know how easy you have.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Slargos on July 15, 2011, 01:23:20 PM
 :lmfao:

Why would you go to a Thai massage and worry about a boner? God you're naive.  :lol:
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 01:28:20 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 15, 2011, 01:23:20 PM
:lmfao:

Why would you go to a Thai massage and worry about a boner? God you're naive.  :lol:
Well it was at the legit spa at my hotel, not some bordello den. :P
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Valmy on July 15, 2011, 01:33:22 PM
Yeah it is annoying.  I do not really know if they are turned on until it is unnecessary information.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 01:34:21 PM
Quote from: Valmy on July 15, 2011, 01:33:22 PM
Yeah it is annoying.  I do not really know if they are turned on until it is unnecessary information.
I do not understand what you said.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Valmy on July 15, 2011, 01:34:42 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 01:28:20 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 15, 2011, 01:23:20 PM
:lmfao:

Why would you go to a Thai massage and worry about a boner? God you're naive.  :lol:
Well it was at the legit spa at my hotel, not some bordello den. :P

See if this was Bangkok instead of the Canaries it could be both.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Slargos on July 15, 2011, 01:35:12 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 01:28:20 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 15, 2011, 01:23:20 PM
:lmfao:

Why would you go to a Thai massage and worry about a boner? God you're naive.  :lol:
Well it was at the legit spa at my hotel, not some bordello den. :P

:lol:

I rest my case.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: HVC on July 15, 2011, 01:39:32 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 01:34:21 PM
Quote from: Valmy on July 15, 2011, 01:33:22 PM
Yeah it is annoying.  I do not really know if they are turned on until it is unnecessary information.
I do not understand what you said.
You don't know if a woman is aroused until your basically to the point of having sex anyway.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Slargos on July 15, 2011, 01:41:17 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 15, 2011, 01:39:32 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 01:34:21 PM
Quote from: Valmy on July 15, 2011, 01:33:22 PM
Yeah it is annoying.  I do not really know if they are turned on until it is unnecessary information.
I do not understand what you said.
You I don't know if a woman is aroused until your I'm basically to the point of having sex anyway.

FYP, ladiesman217. :P
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: LaCroix on July 15, 2011, 01:42:21 PM
thread title reminds me of this, if completely unrelated :P

http://hbr.org/2011/06/defend-your-research-what-makes-a-team-smarter-more-women/ar/1
QuoteDefend Your Research: What Makes a Team Smarter? More Women

The finding: There's little correlation between a group's collective intelligence and the IQs of its individual members. But if a group includes more women, its collective intelligence rises.

The research: Professors Woolley and Malone, along with Christopher Chabris, Sandy Pentland, and Nada Hashmi, gave subjects aged 18 to 60 standard intelligence tests and assigned them randomly to teams. Each team was asked to complete several tasks—including brainstorming, decision making, and visual puzzles—and to solve one complex problem. Teams were given intelligence scores based on their performance. Though the teams that had members with higher IQs didn't earn much higher scores, those that had more women did.

The challenge: Are brainy people overrated? Are women the true key to success? Professors Woolley and Malone, defend your research.

Woolley: We've replicated the findings twice now. Many of the factors you might think would be predictive of group performance were not. Things like group satisfaction, group cohesion, group motivation—none were correlated with collective intelligence. And, of course, individual intelligence wasn't highly correlated, either.

Malone: Before we did the research, we were afraid that collective intelligence would be just the average of all the individual IQs in a group. So we were surprised but intrigued to find that group intelligence had relatively little to do with individual intelligence.

HBR: But gender does play a role?

Malone: It's a preliminary finding—and not a conventional one. The standard argument is that diversity is good and you should have both men and women in a group. But so far, the data show, the more women, the better.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: HVC on July 15, 2011, 01:45:09 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 15, 2011, 01:41:17 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 15, 2011, 01:39:32 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 01:34:21 PM
Quote from: Valmy on July 15, 2011, 01:33:22 PM
Yeah it is annoying.  I do not really know if they are turned on until it is unnecessary information.
I do not understand what you said.
You I don't know if a woman is aroused until your I'm basically to the point of having sex anyway.

FYP, ladiesman217. :P
lol. ya there are signs. dilated pupils, change in resperation, flushing and others, but no where near as obvious as a boner :P
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Slargos on July 15, 2011, 01:45:54 PM
 :lmfao:

Yes, this is why women are behind all of recorded history's scientific progress, after all.  :hmm:

I have no doubt that the presence of females will provoke nerds into working harder, in a bid to impress them, but I wouldn't expect the results to be directly proportional to the amount of females, rather the opposite.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: HVC on July 15, 2011, 01:47:13 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on July 15, 2011, 01:42:21 PM
thread title reminds me of this, if completely unrelated :P
competetion. dudes want to impress the girls so they try harder :D
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: HVC on July 15, 2011, 01:48:42 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 15, 2011, 01:45:54 PM
:lmfao:

Yes, this is why women are behind all of recorded history's scientific progress, after all.  :hmm:

I have no doubt that the presence of females will provoke nerds into working harder, in a bid to impress them, but I wouldn't expect the results to be directly proportional to the amount of females, rather the opposite.
they should run two tests. same guys, but with two groups of women. attractive and not attractive. wonder what the results would be.and at what point the distraction starts to diminish results.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: LaCroix on July 15, 2011, 01:58:09 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 15, 2011, 01:47:13 PMcompetetion. dudes want to impress the girls so they try harder :D

but then 3 males, 3 women shouldn't really be any different than 2 males and 4 women, etc
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Slargos on July 15, 2011, 02:07:40 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on July 15, 2011, 01:58:09 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 15, 2011, 01:47:13 PMcompetetion. dudes want to impress the girls so they try harder :D

but then 3 males, 3 women shouldn't really be any different than 2 males and 4 women, etc

And did the study test that?

Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: HVC on July 15, 2011, 02:08:56 PM
Morewomen mean less need to compete. When in doubt there are two truths in the world: men want sex and women want to be impressed
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 02:13:21 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 15, 2011, 01:47:13 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on July 15, 2011, 01:42:21 PM
thread title reminds me of this, if completely unrelated :P
competetion. dudes want to impress the girls so they try harder :D
So how come some of the greatest brains were fags?
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: HVC on July 15, 2011, 02:18:24 PM
they wanted to impress and nail their male colleagues :P. And really, why do gays always want to claim all achievements :lol: .
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 02:24:15 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 15, 2011, 02:18:24 PM
they wanted to impress and nail their male colleagues :P. And really, why do gays always want to claim all achievements :lol: .
Not all. But for example the Italian renaissance had an overrepresentation of homos. :P
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: LaCroix on July 15, 2011, 02:28:09 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 15, 2011, 02:08:56 PM
Morewomen mean less need to compete. When in doubt there are two truths in the world: men want sex and women want to be impressed

but the "group intelligence" increased with the greater disparity in women (more) to men (less). at least, i assume based off-

QuoteBut so far, the data show, the more women, the better.

@slargos: i think so, because that's what it seems the conclusion is. maybe not
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: HVC on July 15, 2011, 02:31:17 PM
The more the better doesnt mean more women then men. Anyway tongues been firmly in cheek since the start of this thread. No idea why groups got smarter.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: garbon on July 15, 2011, 02:43:07 PM
Quote from: Slargos on July 15, 2011, 01:45:54 PM
:lmfao:

Yes, this is why women are behind all of recorded history's scientific progress, after all.  :hmm:

I have no doubt that the presence of females will provoke nerds into working harder, in a bid to impress them, but I wouldn't expect the results to be directly proportional to the amount of females, rather the opposite.

You realize that the study was about groups, right? Doesn't that just show that they help with an assist?
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: The Brain on July 15, 2011, 02:57:14 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 02:13:21 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 15, 2011, 01:47:13 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on July 15, 2011, 01:42:21 PM
thread title reminds me of this, if completely unrelated :P
competetion. dudes want to impress the girls so they try harder :D
So how come some of the greatest brains were fags?

Dream on, little canary.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 02:57:33 PM
Speaking seriously, women tend to add a significant cooperative/conciliatory element to a group. From my experience, whenever I was in negotiations with only / predominantly men, there has always been a lot of time wasted on dig-waving/posturing/trying to prove who is right and whatnot. When I went to negotiations with a female partner I work with, however, she often managed to turn this into more cooperative excercise, by conceding points that were unnecessary and whatnot. 
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Ed Anger on July 15, 2011, 02:58:35 PM
Women are best in the kitchen making me a sandwich.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Admiral Yi on July 15, 2011, 03:10:53 PM
How does one objectively assess the results of a brainstorming session?  It's possible the results are legit, it's also possible the results were rigged.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Ideologue on July 15, 2011, 03:15:29 PM
Women's plumbing is better, you crypto-straight.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Eddie Teach on July 15, 2011, 03:18:25 PM
While external plumbing has its downside, I wouldn't trade it for visits from Aunt Flo.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 03:29:09 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 15, 2011, 03:10:53 PM
How does one objectively assess the results of a brainstorming session?  It's possible the results are legit, it's also possible the results were rigged.
Well, from the exercises I participated in, they give you a fixed time limit and a goal ("produce 10 ideas to deal with a problem and present it to the examiner"). The group that is able to prepare a final product is better than a group that just spends the time talking. I noticed women are better in structuring.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: The Brain on July 15, 2011, 03:29:37 PM
Women are indeed natural secretaries.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 03:31:17 PM
Quote from: The Brain on July 15, 2011, 03:29:37 PM
Women are indeed natural secretaries.

Well, it's one way to look at it, but men tend to ramble and go off a tangent. I think this study proves that mixed groups are better. That's really a no-brainer.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Ideologue on July 15, 2011, 03:32:13 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on July 15, 2011, 03:18:25 PM
While external plumbing has its downside, I wouldn't trade it for visits from Aunt Flo.

The only thing that would really frighten me is pregnancy.  That shit's pretty hardcore.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Valmy on July 15, 2011, 03:38:18 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 15, 2011, 03:29:09 PM
Well, from the exercises I participated in, they give you a fixed time limit and a goal ("produce 10 ideas to deal with a problem and present it to the examiner"). The group that is able to prepare a final product is better than a group that just spends the time talking. I noticed women are better in structuring.

I sure wish one of these good structuring women would tell my lady bosses how to structure meetings then.  They could easily turn a five minutes of business into an hour long mess babbling on about non-business at hand related things. 
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Ed Anger on July 15, 2011, 03:39:40 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 15, 2011, 03:32:13 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on July 15, 2011, 03:18:25 PM
While external plumbing has its downside, I wouldn't trade it for visits from Aunt Flo.

The only thing that would really frighten me is pregnancy.  That shit's pretty hardcore.

Cons: Pain. Babycannon can get damaged.

Pros: Crotchfruit annoys Mart.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: LaCroix on July 15, 2011, 03:47:38 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 15, 2011, 03:10:53 PM
How does one objectively assess the results of a brainstorming session?  It's possible the results are legit, it's also possible the results were rigged.

they produced the results twice. how much more do you need? ;)
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Fate on July 16, 2011, 01:32:43 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on July 15, 2011, 03:32:13 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on July 15, 2011, 03:18:25 PM
While external plumbing has its downside, I wouldn't trade it for visits from Aunt Flo.

The only thing that would really frighten me is pregnancy.  That shit's pretty hardcore.

Pregnancy is a but a blip compared to a life time of UTIs. Fuck that noise.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Josquius on July 16, 2011, 04:25:03 AM
I definitely have to agree on this being a big advantage women have. Public stiffies FTL.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Brazen on July 16, 2011, 05:26:10 AM
Hate to break it to you, but pregnancy and UTIs are both preventable.

My meetings are always short and to the point because I hate them and will avoid pointless ones. Even the ones I arrange in the pub.

How do you tell if a woman is turned on? Check her reactions when presented with a pair of Louboutins. Or when Nathan Fillion is on TV.
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: sbr on July 16, 2011, 05:52:02 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi195.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz133%2Fsbr32%2Fmotivator_laundry.jpg&hash=7c81d0d4387416b1995d83b6524dab38274cada4)
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: Ed Anger on July 16, 2011, 05:54:25 PM
Where is my goddamn sandwich?
Title: Re: Women > men
Post by: MadImmortalMan on July 16, 2011, 08:41:04 PM
Quote from: HVC on July 15, 2011, 02:08:56 PM
Morewomen mean less need to compete.

Only while the meeting is in session. As soon as it's over they all set to work stabbing each other in the back.