Please recognize that I chose to ask this question in the philosophic board.

If I knew how to take a poll, I would have asked this question as a poll, before opening the thread. Unfortunately, I can be a bit of a techno-greek, and I haven't figured polls on DF as yet. So here goes...

Are homo sapien females more dangerous than males? This is an all inclusive question. It includes defending a family member, a friend, co-worker, or, in particular a direct offspring. When ALL possible senerios are considered, which gender is to be feared the most in a to the death conflict?

I would appreciate it if this didn't reduce itself to a flame fest.

No, males tend to be more violent, aggressive, physically powerful and dangerous. It has something to do with our smaller brain size, extra male hormone and 10,000 years of socialization. Women tend to be much better peace keepers and civilization makers. Men are much better at hard sciences, mathamatical logic and violence.

Overall, Males but a Woman has her strengths in different areas if you will. For example, it could be just as, if not more dangerous to attack a Woman as Males who know her would be highly likely to defend her with violence.
I would not want to be in the way of a Mother intent on defending her Child either.

I would be even less inclined to mess with a kid whos f ather is defending it.

It would depend on the mother imo.

I would think that males would be more dangerous in a 'to death' scenario because lots of males have more physical strength than females.

If you give everyone guns then I guess it would be pretty much equal.

REDNECK!

i guess youve never seen women live together? there is NO keeping the peace. women can be just as violent as men can. ive seen women do some downright evil things. hell, Lorena Bobbitt cut off her husbands dick. ive yet to hear an article about a guy cutting off another guys dick. and some women marry and kill their hubbys. or their own children.

women can be plenty brutal and dangerous. most women are better at plotting too.

You scare me.

And I'll just leave it at that.

Not really, and for every Lorena Bobbit (who was raped by her husband by the way) there is a Jack the Ripper who was cutting ovaries out of women and taking bites out of them.

i think women are more dangerous, sure men are physicaly stronger. but to me that's their downfall, they know they are strong so don't really plan. whereas, like lily says we tend to plot things out, and really. if you piss us off, we will get you back. an it is usualy a lot worse than getting a bashing.

nice.

You and Lil' need to stay away fom each other. The two of you teamed together would be scary cubed.

heh, out of all the people here Spikess would be among the coolest to meet.

and a few others. mia and lenina would be dangerous too. and i like them as well

ah were lovely really...say other wise an we'll rip your balls off!

I rest my case...

Humans are just worth the watching, man or woman...

It doesn't matter, male or female, when you're dealing with humans, as we say in Scotland, ye need een on the back a yer heid whatever gender they are...

i don't see the philosophical relevance of this, but whatever....

anywho....who's more dangerous?

the girls are of course sayin' the girls, givin' a round-about justification based on the "planning" strategies of women, while forgettin' that "strategy" is a mere subject of who is or isn't "dangerous".......many things must be considered....strength, staminia, emotions (or lack thereof), psychology, physiology, motivation, etc. etc. etc........

from all of these one could deduce who is a more dangerous person....for example, Lorena Bobbit is far more dangerous than Mr. Rogers, while Ted Bundy is far more dangerous than Lorena Bobbit, while a dictator or tyrant (such as Hitler) is far more dangerous than these individuals.....

and speakin' in terms of "violence"....males have this one hands down....even in lower-level species, such as Hippo's, the male is always the agressor....."what's mine is mine, and i have the testosterone to prove it!"..........

so yes, males are the superior gender......sure, there are some evil women out there, but men have always been the more evil of the two.......take your pick from any serial-killer.....man has always been the one to fear in that aspect.....white men especially.......but, in the long run, if you took everyone in the world and forced them to fight (anything goes), despite females out-numbering males, males will still come on top..........

oh, and speaking in terms of strategy, men are the superior ones.......strategy itself has to take into account several factors, such as bravery, "suicidal-missions," chance, logic, etc. etc. etc.

I don't think the entire premise has any relevance in life whatsoever... Men can't survive without women and women can't survive without men... Women and men are two parts of a whole... Women, I've noticed, tend to be more stable, better organised and better at multitasking than men, whereas men tend to be physically stronger, more aggressive and are often more at home with technology and complex machinery, and are often more focused on single goals than women... This is why it tends to be men who make scientific discoveries...

Women tend to be more independant that men too... I've seen a lot of men go completely to pieces and spiral into absurd patterns of behaviour involving alcoholism and pathetic advances towars women entirely unsuitable for them when their girlfriends leave them, whereas women tend not to do this... This is because men try to repress their emotions, so they manifest in more perverse ways...

Of course these are just generalisations... Margaret Thatcher was as aggressive as any man, and Rosiland Franklin was as focused as any man... Of course a salient point in all of this is the obvious one that if you had a war between sexes, you would very quickly run out of combatants...

The relevance has to do with another thread that got into discussing women in the military, and more specifically, direct combat roles. I was, and still am, looking for feedback regarding the relative potential viciousness of each gender under all circumstances. If the conclusion is that both are equally dangerous and/or deadly (which is my opinion), then the role of each gender in combat would be a function of training and best utilization of natural attributes. I started a seperate thread, and purposely left the specific subject of women in combat out, because I felt it would bias individual responses.

ill say that most men would be physically stronger, but since you asked who is more dangerous...ill go with women.