Survivor Experiment: Women vs. Men

Whether patriarchy has ever managed society or not, we can safely say there is always a feminist queefing out books about the end of patriarchy.

There is, surprisingly, very little data available about what life would be like in a society made up of only men or only women. Though feminists claim women would be better at running the world.

Survivor Experiment: Women vs. Men

A social scientist might want to perform an experiment where groups of men and groups of women are left to their own devices, having to work together to survive against the elements and build a civilization from scratch. However, this scientist would have a very hard time convincing ethical review boards that the inevitable suffering of his participants would weight up against the value of the data.

Well...

Reality television is not bound by ethical constraints.

A few years ago, I had the pleasure of watching the Dutch version of Survivor (Expeditie Robinson) with my feminist roommate. That particular season would have two islands, one populated by men and one populated by women. My roommate had been promoting that particular series to me and the other students in the house for weeks because it would show us, according to her, what a society run by women (free from the evils of patriarchy) would be like.

Oh boy...

Survivor Experiment: Women vs. Men

Here is what happened: initially both groups were dropped on their respective islands, given some supplies to get started and left to fend for themselves. In both groups there was some initial squabbling as people tried to figure out a local hierarchy. The men pretty much did whatever they felt was necessary... there was no leader giving orders.

Men who felt like hunting, foraging or fishing did so. Another guy decided he was fed up with sitting on sand and started making benches. Others built a hut that gradually grew and evolved. Another guy cooked every night. Within days a neat little civilization was thriving, each day being slightly more prosperous than the previous one.

The women....

Survivor Experiment: Women vs. Men

They settled into a routine as well. The hung up a clothesline to dry their towels, then proceeded to sunbathe and squabble. Because unlike men, women were unable to do anything without consensus of the whole group. And because it was a group of at least a dozen women, consensus was never reached. During the next few episodes, the women ate all their initial supplies, got drenched by tropical storms several times, were eaten alive by sand fleas and were generally miserable. The men on the other hand, were quite content. There were disagreements of course, but they were generally resolved.

Survivor Experiment: Women vs. Men

Eventually, the people running the program decided something had to change. In order to help the women out, three men would be selected to go to their island!!!

In return, three women would take their place at the men’s island.

Initially, the three men selected for the women’s island were ecstatic, for obvious reason. But then they arrived at the island and were greeted by the women.

"Where is your hut?", they asked.

"We have no hut"

"Where are your supplies?" they asked, dismayed

"We ate all the rice"

And so on. The three men ended up working like dogs, using all the skills developed by trial and error in their first few weeks – building a hut, fish, trying to get the women to forage...

Survivor Experiment: Women vs. Men

The women...

They continued to bitch and sunbathe. The three women who were sent to the men’s island were delighted. Food, shelter and plenty of male attention was freely available. They too continued to sunbathe.

And that my friends, is what patriarchy is!!!

Feminist Camille Paglia once said "If women ran society, we'd still be living in mud huts."

I always thought that was a little harsh, but Survivor US, UK and Dutch, the SAME thing happened.

That particular season of Dutch Survivor is not unique. CBS broadcast several Survivor seasons in the US, where men and women started off in separate groups. In most cases (the Amazon and One World), the result was the same. The men quickly got their act together, getting access to food, fire and shelter while the women spent a lot of time and energy on petty little squabbles, eating their meager supplies, getting drenched in storms and generally being pathetic. The opposite situation, where men didn’t get their act together while women quickly built a functional micro society, has not yet been observed outside of feminist fiction, and it probably never will. Ha!


2|18
2050

Most Helpful Girl

  • I 100% agree with this post. Men are better at survival, that's why we need them. Women are better at giving birth, raising children, etc. As sexist as that may sound, we are better at those things than men. If we combine the knowledge or men and the knowledge of women, the world would be a different place :)

    3|31
    4|1
    • All that sexism really means is acknowledging that there's a difference between men and women. What you're saying should be common sense, and the world you describe was the world before modern times/feminism which has brainwashed people into obsessing over equality.

    • Show All
    • YES I love seeing Girls or women not trying to jump hoops or anythign that HAVE LOGIC :D
      u got my up vote

    • I like you :)

Most Helpful Guy

  • Women won't admit it because they are stubborn, but men don't need women except for sex and making new people.
    Women can't live without men because men create and sustain everything that makes their lives easy and livable.
    Without men women would perish. There is no sustainable society maintained completely by women.

    1|13
    9|3
    • Without men, most women couldn't get their oil changed. (with some happy exceptions)

    • Show All
    • cuz your argument is nothing more than speculation. The development of robots and AI is present throughout most industries so where is the evidence that men are making/supporting/maintaining/whatever all the robots?

    • You are the one who was suggesting the robots ffs!
      The evidence to support the idea that men will be doing it, is that men are the ones fucking doing it NOW. Therefore if technology is being created and advanced mainly by men now, it will continue to be advanced and maintained later by men as well.

Recommended myTakes

Join the discussion

What Girls Said 19

  • Sorry I'm not going to use "reality" t. v. as a credible source for anything. If they aren't outright scripting it and a lot of so called reality shows do they are masterminding drama behind the scenes to make it interesting to watch and editing things in way to present a storyline. They also purposely choose clashing personality types. Normal people don't get on reality shows.

    6|1
    0|1
    • Id mostly agree except I dont think its right to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Sure, there's a lot of scripting through it that undermines the results of the presentation. But, that doesn't mean that everything that occured on such a show is immediately false. Its just not best for a official representation.

    • Show All
    • @Spawnface it isn’t a strawman when that is what you said. You claimed that you don’t think the inferences about the nature of the majority of women shouldn’t be thrown out just because this is from the media. Either state what you actually mean plainly or don’t complain about being misunderstood.

    • Na, not interested in sophistry. I'll go talk to people that can keep their top on.

  • men are naturally better at survival... but that being said that doesn't make them superior, because those men wouldn't be alive if women didn't have the motherly instinct to do anything for her children. We are both good at certain things and we should just accept that and stop fighting it :)

    1|4
    0|0
    • but that being said there still can be other factors here involved in the mens success and womens failure.

  • Are you seriously using a reality show that's purposefully edited to create drama as a basis for your ideas? Like really?

    4|1
    0|9
    • Yeah i agree it's a reality TV Show and it might be biased a little in some areas but i think it reflects what would have happened correctly although i think the females would have tried a little harder instead of sunbathing lol.

    • Show All
    • Okay im sorry for whatever i've done to you.

    • @ObedientMalee i now this is old. but dude dont apologize.

  • Girls are taught to be emotional, mentally and physically dependent on others- how else do you think these women would survive. What is Girls Scouts? Selling cookies or some shit? I don't know.
    Boys on the other hand, are taught to be independent. Boy Scouts teach you survival skills.
    It's like you put a rich person and a poor person in the wild and you tell them to survive on their own for a month. A guarantee you the rich person would barely know how to take care of themselves.

    2|1
    1|12
    • its a little bit of that, but its also biological, women are simply naturally more emotional, and more mentally and physically dependent on others on average compared to men. you can raise them to be better at handling that stuff, but they are still not going to be as good at things like this compared to men. Nature made it that way.

    • Show All
    • Biology factors in to this. People didn't start gravitating to these trends because society said so. There is no blank slate, biology drives society.

    • The men in the TV show were submissive

  • Unfortunately, it's not surprising that those women would be like that because a lot are but it doesn't help that the shows purposely choose those types of women. Either way I'm grateful to have the knowledge of how to survive.

    1|3
    1|1
    • Good point. People here are dismissing any validity to the topic based on the subject being a tv show, not fairly representing the public or women. However those women do represent a good portion of women. They were ofcoarse deliberately chosen to demonstrate the underlaying theory, or to test it.

      That said, take it with a grain of salt because its not conclusive of much of anything past what it can show.

  • My hell, you are the exact opposite of these radical feminists and equally as annoying. Get over the gender war. Honestly

    4|1
    0|15
    • They spout false crap. This is legit proof. Big difference.

    • Show All
    • @Jamesol1 yeah there are more idiot men than women, but on average, the average man also has slightly higher IQ than the average woman, while majority of geniuses are men.

    • The men in the TV show were submissive

  • The women knew good and well that it was temporary, so they felt less inclined to try. That’s just my opinion.

    2|1
    0|3
    • The guys knew the same.

    • Show All
    • That's why I said "reality" - it's like Bear Grylls, where he'd drink piss and eat bugs to survive on camera; but have a buffet ready and waiting for him just behind the camera.

      Big Brother was one that kind of shows your point; the entertainment came from the challenges, if you watched it live sub-primetime it was as boring as watching paint dry.

  • Interesting one. I wish all women were taught since children to be independent.

    2|5
    3|1
  • They’ve sent good men and trashy women to a survival group so what? I still don’t need a man to live and patriarchy suck ass

    0|1
    1|4
    • I agree that the reality show is a terrible way to prove anything but the patriarchy doesent suck ass it just doesent exist

    • Show All
    • Nice. lol.

      Trashy women though? Kinda throwing people under the bus a bit.

    • Lol victim mentality is strong here

  • Sadly around 80%-90% of women are like that.

    1|14
    4|0
  • Is this the one all the guys get naked kind a like Lord of the flies ? Hoping so

    0|0
    0|0
  • This is funny because you can’t rely on entertainment shows for valid conclusions. You do know they screen for certain traits for entertainment purposes for these shows don’t you. They don’t use controls to ensure it’s a fair test.
    Secondly I know many women who are good at survival skills, many are also outdoor and survivalist leaders. I’m not saying men aren’t as good, I’m saying you’re way underestimating women. My best guy friend (who grew up in the outdoors) still looks to me for advice on certain things. It really isn’t about gender, it’s about characteristics and qualities in the individual person. Some people don’t follow stereotypical roles, they do what they enjoy and they are good at it.

    1|0
    1|1
    • And if you really want to take it as low as a reality tv show, look at that military female who was on one series who was clearly a leader and do-er. I would have had her on my team any day - she was well away motivating the men to crack on with jobs with her because some of the guys didn’t have a clue. Just saying.

    • You can pick out one person from the menagerie of women on these survival show, and her great skill is "leadership" - when it was just demonstrated that the men operate as individuals without a leader; and, of course, "leadership" is the diplomatic way of saying "her biggest asset was telling other people to do everything for them".

      You inadvertently made the opposite point from the one that was intended. You really think they screened women to find the weaklings? I guess - given you use the example of a female military member - the USMC must likewise have biased their own experiments which found women drag down the efficiency of any unit they're incorporated into.

      Your right, reality tv isn't experimental conditions, but every time we try to experiment with it - or do it playfully through reality tv - we get the same result. Building a worldview around ignoring everything around you isn't healthy.

      Christ, in Britain there was an experiment to see how people handled being completely exclyded from other people; and you had women going through mental breaks in a matter of hours. The one woman that did cope, coped by painting her family and hanging the pictures on the wall; fair play, that's smart, but it still shows a reliance on others to valudate the self.

      The point isn't actually that men or women are better, it's that the feminists line that governance by women would be a utopia is a lie. In the same sense, look at the claims women wouldn't drag their nations to war; despite Thatcher being a war hawk, and if you look at the military industrial complex in the USA there's an awful lot of women in positions of power - actually it is an abnormally (compared to wider society) high rate.

  • Most people live best in groups, not going solo. Everyone saying men provided the food historically aren’t really informed. Women and children traditionally provided most calories in prehistoric and early human life through gathering berries, leaves, nuts, etc. Men provided smaller amounts of protein. Both baskets and Spears were needed to survive. Etc. Men, Women, kids had to be tough and interdependent.

    1|0
    1|0
    • can't really confirm or agree with what your saying without the details on the matter, however I would agree that the work of ancient life is most likely misterpreted with women of the lower classes doing much of the labour in farming, etc. Wheress the misinterpretation is that thry only raised kids. Although, Im uncertain as to what the main occupations of men were through the generations. Id assume its much more than our common veiw.

    • Show All
    • I’d guess anyway - I don’t actually know that part.

    • Im a bit uncertain as to what you mean. I am also not an expert so I can only offer bland veiws. But just for interpretation, in ancient Japan there would have been the 4 common groups, the merchant, the samurai, the farmer and I can't remember the other one. But one might assume the jobs were generally confined that way with women primarily at work at the home, which wouldve included a wide variety of jobs including assistance to the mans occupation.

  • Reality shows aren't credible sources for something like this... There would have to be an actual long term study done. Otherwise, there's no point discussing it. I for one, wouldn't let those idiots sit on their ass like that. Stupid...

    3|0
    0|2
    • Yes reality shows aren't great study term, but hey you have better study case?

  • I just don't think it's a fair to compare men to women or to try to constantly make us all equal. We are made differently and that's ok. That doesn't mean some women can't do what men do but yes men have the advantage in almost every aspect. Men were literally made physically stronger and expected to provide for women. The stronger ones are always going to end up running society, that's just how it is.

    What I find so funny about women who yell about patriarchy constantly is how they ignore the fact that men (who are stronger and most of the time smarter than us), not only cater to us still but think we should have equal rights. We have most of the power in western culture because men gave it to us and these chicks are still complaining about useless shit.

    If they really cared about the world, they would be focusing their time and energy on helping both sexes become better people, not starting non-sense gender battles over petty things.

    2|7
    3|0
    • Women occupy the social domain dominantly. Coercion and manipulation are the hallmarks of the natural female. The females you speak of are using their primary functions to mediate and garner resources at the cost of long term benefits to society. As with men, good people are born from relinquishing our primitive nature. A good woman as you would say would care about both sexes, more importantly the reality of circumstances. Those other women are only enacting the very stereotype they refute and are ultimately selfish and simple minded.

  • they are men so why didn't they told them to fuck off? They're just submissive. So stop complaining.

    0|1
    0|1
    • Some men are but some women are too

    • Show All
    • @Spawnface That's true. Lots of things can come off as good then turn bad because of the people.
      Feminism started for getting the right to vote, then they asked to work (the rich one cause the poor women already worked for many years, only the rich one weren't able to work) and then they asked for a lot of others stuff (especially in the late 60s and in the 70s). I think it's when feminism started to get quite messy and bad. In the 70s.

    • Id believe the elements of the government have special programs in the military branch aimed at infiltrating and undermining any and all grass roots movements. So any type of popular movement in my opinion has or will be compromises in time. Rumors even the say secret-iest of them all the freemasons were taken over by spooks.

  • Totally agree! We are different, and we have different attributes. Combine them together, instead of forcing equality when some things just naturally never will be equal. We will never be equal, because we are different. There will always be privilege, and biology will determine some things in life. Some things are worth changing when it comes to gender roles, but this third wave isn't contributing to anything progressive.

    0|1
    0|0
    • But again, maybe they just chose the wrong girls.

    • Show All
    • @Spawnface The perfect example of privilege without responsibility was that women could vote without signing up for the draft.

      Actually, if you look at the timeline for suffrage in Europe, Britain for example, men got the vote by fighting a world war; while women stayed at home handing out white feathers - an accusation of cowardice - to men that hadn't volunteered to go die for them.

      From the beginning it has been privilege not equality; they want "equality" but their idea of equality is to get the same outcome without being required to do the same work.

    • @Praec

      What is severely overlooked is our histories relationship with mental illness or psychological phenonema. Today we often use terms like narcissist and even have clinical diagnoses of narcisistic personality disorder. We are far more knowledgable of the type of illnesses that plague the minds of humanity. While many people would attribute narcissism to the ones they know or meet today, it is almost never an occurance that people attribute any type of mental disorder to the people of our history, or at least in a way that isn't out of pure spite and vitriol. When it comes to the past it was far more prevelant, the spread of mental illness, and we fail to think of mass movements or cultural aspects as having relationship to such things. When it comes to the plights of womens historical sufferings, many of it is true, however at the same time a lot of the things we believe are the machinations of people like narcissists that have usurped our common understanding of reality and lead us to believe that women were nothing more than slaves without any power over males and society while ofcoarse using such a false belief to undermine the rights and well being of others

  • This is very obviously anti-female, so anyone that takes it seriously is a total biased idiot... which it seems most men are. You're just a natural product of a sexually reproductive species, and as such women don't need to survive without your help. It's not even a question, since without the other, we would be extinct. Women are unfortunately stuck with most of the effects and work of reproduction, so men should be the ones that have responsibilities of survival... what the hell else are they gonna do? If they didn't, they would be useless.

    It is completely ignorant, however, to believe that women couldn't take care of themselves if they needed to. Maybe not as well as men, but we definitely could do it well enough. Especiall since, if there were no men, we wouldn't have to go through pregnancy. Even the weakest prey have ways in which they are able to survive...

    5|0
    2|11
    • I agree that this is antifemale. But the men on the show was submissive because they did what the women told them to do

    • You say its antifemale but your actually giving it credence in your own reasoning. Its stating that women can't survive under the same conditions of men due to social factors. you're saying its anti female but you too are saying it exists but for biological factors. So why is it antifemale?



  • interesting

    0|1
    0|0

What Guys Said 49

  • This has some merit but I think it important to note how these shows are mainly made with Western women. Women of other cultures tend to be more hardworking and organised.

    0|3
    2|0
  • I already knew the outcome of this. The reason why you see this isn't just because they are women, but because western women have been babied and sheltered. Just this week I helped the entire neighborhood by getting rid of our racoon problem with only 4 people ACTUALLY helping. The whole block is filled with older folks which is a perfect excuse BUT there are some younger females ranging from 16-28. The other 5 males on my block goto work everyday until 11 pm or even later. the younger ladies who went to ''help'' was just dead weight and complained after the first 30 minutes. One of them even told me herself, '' women shouldn't be doing this'' I basically dealt with this problem myself with NO help besides somebody offering me a glass of water which I could have easily gotten at my house down the street. The other 2 girls were just flirting with me and joking around the entire time. it was as if they forgot what we were even doing! To make the two girls feel helpful I told them to go spread out and set up traps, they set up 2 traps in the most dumbest places and then went back to talking with eachother. They were stuck on the most superficial things and it was as if I was baby sitting! the 4 people who I mentioned eariler who helped with the problem were mostly males, one kid who was 14, another male who was 17 and a older guy who was about 50 something BUT there was one girl who was 26 , recently divorced and she clearly was nothing like these other females. I think the problem here is that we dont give out responsibility to a lot of our females in society, and we treat them as if they are these helpless creatures. this makes them turn out like anyone else who gets sheltered. terms like ''daddies little princess'' doesn't just come from nowhere.

    0|4
    0|0
    • I agree. It's nurture not nature. We're all programmed to survive.

    • Show All
    • If I weren't already engaged I'd want to marry you, anon. Very... Well... Just logical.

    • @CrystalChild lol thanks and im going off annon so I can block this guy because I know he will reply with some more crap lol.

  • As a near psychologist, I have listened to the pains of women, and some aspects of feminism I sympathize - unequal pay, sexual assault, and harassment I am with you 110%.

    The rest however, such as being equal will never come to pass. Sorry to say, but while it is my firm belief that men and women are not very different, there are differences.

    Long story short, women tend to make better decisions in the short run as they like to put a person's feelings into their decisions, men however tend make better decisions in the long run.

    Naturally, this is a social science so you will have exceptions to any observation. With feminists, at least third wave, I feel it's more about superiority and basically when someone says "you can't do it," and your reply, sorry to say, like a child is: "YES I CAN!!! I"LL SHOW YOU!!! "

    Regarding the reality TV shows, understand it is a business - they cater to fashion and what sells. Example: on CNN, every week you have some feminist article about women suffering - what about men? Haven't seen one article yet over the past 5 years.

    Lastly, how many TV shows or movies are actually based on accurate scientific research? Virtually none. I'm Asian, and the politics are very intense within our families, but it's no where near as hell as extreme as the Kardashians or Jersey Shore.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Yep that's pretty standard. I was in a program called choices for 2 years when I was in middle school. We did a lot of leadership activities and long hikes/camping. On their own the girls for the most part got nothing done in camp, they couldn’t set up their own tents, they would ask guys to carry their pack for a little while on the trail because they couldn’t keep up, they’d slack off and ride in the front of a canoe and let a guy be the dominate paddler and rudder while they they mime paddled, they could never light their own fire, they couldn’t make decisions on leadership obstacle puzzles, etc. Sometimes the girls would argue with each other and fight. I remember having 2 girls in my canoe and the girl sitting in the middle was just sitting there day dreaming and the girl in the front who was barely paddling at all started calling her names and before I knew it the girl in the middle was swinging her paddle at the girl in the front hitting her in the back of the head. I was like yo chill! A lot of girls will help if given direction by someone who leads them, but left to their own devices a lot would be in trouble. I was often chosen to lead the group through a lot of leadership trials or whatever and the girls would get in line and do what I told them to do and as a group we’d succeed but without good leadership it went down hill pretty fast with in fighting, bickering, and despondency. I’m sure there are girls out there that are taught to be more tough than most girls, to take responsibility, and how to cary out basic wilderness skills by their dad, but I think even though girls would perform better when working with guys than other girls.

    0|0
    1|0
  • Having been in charge of both an all male division and an all female division on a ship in the middle of the ocean, the male division was less dramatic. With the female division, I felt as if I was Dr. Phil.

    0|5
    0|0
  • @applesandoranges22

    Since you where a coward and blocked me i will reply here, but as always you lost the argument and you where wrong about everything you said, but you are to much of an butthurt idiot to realize it.

    The test subjects of the IQ studies numbered in the 100.000s so its very significant. And if you think these numbers are insufficient to make any conclusion then you can make the same argument for every kind of empirical study ever made, but of course thats wrong as many scientists use this evidence to make advancements in medicine and many other innovations, this is the kind of evidence that is always used to optimize things in every area of life. I never used this survivor experiment alone to make the conclusion that men are superior to women, but this along with all the other evidence proves it, regardless of how much to want to deny it or not, it doesn't change anything.
    You cannot argue further because you know you lost, and then blocked me as expected. pathetic.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Men are general better than women when dropped into a strange area due to how they navigate and able to function. Women gets better the longer they stay in an area.

    Women become more efficient as they fixes the tiny things and memorize the places where things are. They are also exceeding quick at adapting and copying new skills. So if someone in their group managed to do something then the other women would also learn that in a couple days. The women would become much more cohesive with a leader. The leader would be someone who can give people proper tasks to work.

    It's sort of funny but this is how it probably work. It's not because men are better at survival but they are just wired to function as a team even though none of them match each other. They would work better with a leader but they can somehow be productive without a clear ranking. However, sooner or later there would be an alpha male whom everyone would follow because he would be the most effective person.

    It's like when a wife asks his friends where her husband was last night, 5 of them confirmed seeing him, 3 confirmed talking to him and 2 were convinced he was hanging around their houses last night.

    0|1
    0|0
  • One glaring flaw in this thinking. Women chosen for reality tv are picked for their charisma, not their skills. It would stand to reason that women who can rely on looks and charm generally dont need to be self industrious.

    Admittedly, finding self industrious women would be more difficult, as they dont stand out or show boat.

    I do not disagree or agree with the statment that one gender is better then the other at survivor, but just wanted to point that out.

    2|1
    0|4
    • There is a big flaw in your argument, you do not actually know what criteria they used for picking the contestants in either group for this specific show. Im sure there where many women and men who applied for this show while knowing what it was about specifically because they had confidence in their own abilities for this type of situation. Otherwise why would they apply for that show when they could have applied for Paradise Hotel or Ex on the beach instead.

    • Show All
    • @alphadoggystyle Emotiinally sensitive, dramatic guys are not liked, thats why. Every man in a club will want to help the pretty girl with tears, but women (and men) tend to feel uncomfortable around a man in the same situation.

      That being said, depeding on your definition, drama is still fostered, just in a different way. For example, I find It's common practice to select a gay man and a homophobic man to be on the same team. Makes passions rise.

    • when i said dramatic, i didn't mean sensitive, men and women are typically dramatic in different ways. Guys who are carefree and reckless etc, drinks and party a lot, someone who refuses to take orders or is very competitive, if its for the enjoyment of the viewers i know many people men and women who find such guys entertaining even though such men might not be respected in regular circumstances.
      You suggested the women where picked for entertainment reasons, so they might have picked sensitive princess complex women, but at the same time logic then suggests that men would also be selected for entertainment in that case, which would be load and obnoxious clown dudes who only care about party and women. But realistically the people of both genders who applied for the show where those who had an interest in survival, and they where probably picked based on their background skills as well as physical attractiveness, which always brings more viewers.

  • I litteraly died laughing at this part :
    "Where is your hut"
    "We have no hut"
    Where are your supplies"
    "We ate all the rice"

    Hahaha can even imagine the three guys coming for some pussies and ending up in this mess hahaha

    0|2
    2|0
  • men will survive for 100%
    females will die
    if they did this for real
    its bioology girls u can't change that
    u can't kill an animal without crying - we can without thinking if we are hungry and we want to survive

    0|0
    0|0
  • There are certainly cases of individual women surviving on their own, or with their young. There are also situations where all of the men of a tribe have been killed and the women successfully continued the tribe for a generation or so. But as far as I know there have been no successful societies that have completly excluded men from the outset. And I think that you touch on the main reason why, the need to compete for dominant position.

    0|0
    0|0
  • It's true actually and they did this not only in America but the UK and on Bear Gyrlls survivior show to.

    Every single time the men whooped the women's asses and handed em to them on a silver platter and I won't lie I enjoyed every moment of it.

    No shame.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Not all men and women would react that way (a female farmgirl or Marine would do just fine; a male liberal would fail miserably), but certainly many of them are exactly like that.

    0|3
    0|0
  • 5d

    Those stupid leftist twats in the top photo need to be put into jails with the "migrants" for whom their hearts bleed. They would learn painful lessons, and the migrant criminals who behave well might get a special "conjugal visit" as a reward.

    0|0
    0|0
  • I believe men will almost always survive better, but a biiig part of this is how women are raised and spoiled by western society. Men are taught to suck it up and power through harsh trials, while women are taught that they deserve to be protected and are worthy of being spoiled like princesses.

    If I was in a survival group, I'd just do the best I could for everyone and encourage mutually beneficial actions. I'm easy to get along with.

    0|0
    0|0
  • The problem with using a TV show is that these people applied to be on TV and that the show selected them.
    Perhaps the only thing it really shows is the mentality of men and women that want to be on TV.

    0|0
    0|0
  • This is stupid. Overall, in general, yes, men are more equipped to survive on physicality alone, but if you take generic shows with random (or not so random) people, you can fudge the results. Moreover, reality TV shouldn't be the basis of your analysis. And if so, at least do a useful 1. Not the best, but naked and afraid come to mind. A chick outlasted a marine. A random fat dude outlasted a survivalist chick

    Like I said, men are going to generally outlast women in general, but that's more on physical tools. Hell, if I were to gather 10 random women, I bet my life they can destroy any 10 dudes on this site given that most people on here can't fucking chew gum and walk at the same time, let alone go on a survival show

    3|0
    0|7
  • You could just as easily compare a female prison to a male prison and draw the complete opposite conclusion as you've done here.

    Anyone agreeing with ether conclusion is an idiot.

    0|0
    0|0
  • You don't need a reality show to show that men are typically better at survival than women, there's a reason it was men who went out hunting, protecting the women and kids, and engage in physical labor.
    But this is just in a general sense, if you teach a woman how to survive, she can be just as good as men. Have you seen the show Alone? On the last season, the best participant (despite tapping out) was a woman. She literally had everything figured out.

    I bet the women in that Survivor show had never spent a day in the woods, that's why they didn't know shit. They're used to the urban life, with regular jobs and stuff like that.

    1|2
    0|0
  • Having been camping with women this is about right. So basically the women starved and had no shelter and the men live like kings.

    0|2
    2|0
  • Reality TV isn't really a scientific basis for anything factual to be honest...

    1|2
    0|2
    • Men were found to use cardinal directions (north, south, east and west) better. They reached the end of the maze quicker, and also completed more allocated tasks along the way, such as finding a yellow car. The participants used 3D goggles and a joystick in the maze while images of their brains were recorded.

      "Men's sense of direction was more effective. They quite simply got to their destination faster," said Carl Pintzka, a medical doctor and PhD candidate at NTNU's Department of Neuroscience, in a statement.

  • I think our culture cares more about idealogy than... Anything else.

    While there might be sone truth to whatever this show, or this message is promoting, I think the primary motivation and deciding factor behind believing it is only to enforce some idealogical end.

    However, I think in whatever truths we can pick up on we should. They should be evaluated for there worth and passed on accordingly. If it is entirely true that women are too inferior to have a surviving civilization it should be accepted on the basis of truth. However, its likely not an all encompassing truth and I wouldn't rely on this for a thesis to prove the validity of a notion. Its at best pondersome.

    0|0
    0|0
  • You realise the show is just a show right. These people aren't actually in any survival situation at all. It's just hyped for the audience.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Don't forget they still follow the law for the show.
    If it was the apocalypse or a riot the men wouldn't be so kind

    0|1
    0|0
  • I believe this is why patriarchy was born. If women were taught to take responsibility more, I think racial equality isn't far off!

    0|0
    2|0
  • Yes, it's unfortinate but true. Modern women have been taught that they shouldn't "have" to do anything because it's a stereotype... so they stopped then they went to do what men do but found out it sucks to work without having kids and quiting. It sucked to be a mechanic or skateboarder so they spent all of their time labeling themselves as a girl-mech or a skatergirl and stopped doing it.

    But don't believe what you watch on tv or studies. They never test anything often and just talk common sense.

    0|0
    2|0
  • Men can't survive without banging a couple women every once and a while.

    0|1
    1|0
  • lol i have to admit this is kinda funny and it does play out kinda the same in real life as well, take college for example, while all of us (guys and girls) happen to have the exact same lecturers and tools the girls seem to be much more confused when its time to study for exams, men study whatever is available to study women... they spend uneeded time and effort trying to get a hold of more studying material despite having enough to pass the exam with flying colors.

    in differnet fields as well men seem to be much quicker thinkers, they dont spend much time thinking and instead focus on doing, and of course most of dont care about other guys so the end results is different guys doing a bunch of differnet things, that eventually join up to create a better bigger thing.

    0|1
    3|0
    • To insinuate that men are physically more capable, is one thing. But mentally? I don't know where you studied, but it's sad that you have the impression that women can't be as quick thinkers as men are or disorganized. The problem is, women are less often inclined to believe that they are capable of doing certain positions (the issue of raising children differently), but if they were raised in a supportive environment and are confident, there is mentally absolutely no difference between them.

    • Show All
    • @alpha Yes, I see what you mean. I agree that man are physically more capable naturally and I don't see how can people go against that. What bothers me is that the whole society is lead by the belief that women are only lead by emotions and incapable of strong mental capabilities. I've read a lot about the IQ being connected not only to sex but also to race. It's something that is a fact and exists as such, but I disagree with not allowing people who do not fit in the traditional picture of what a capable person is, to prove themselves. I, as a woman, am highly capable at what I do and professionally am everything but submissive and I have a mind set of the traditional alphamale, at least when it comes to work. And when it comes to home & families, in my experience, women are naturally lets say nurturing. I don't see why people wouldn't accept women can be nurturing at home but equal work wise. I just strongly believe that no one is inclined to anything, its all work&dedication.

    • @linahh sure, i also believe in equality of opportunity, most men do. However society and feminists also want equality of outcomes, which means they are not going to be satisfied until we have 50/50 men and women in all fields that are high prestige and that pays well, but thats never going to happen because of biological differences between men and women, men are simply more capable on average when it comes to demanding jobs and leadership positions. Im sure many feminists know this as well but won't admit it, and instead demand quotation laws to put more women in positions they haven't proven they can handle.

  • A new survivor. Nice. Been out of touch a little. Time for me to tune in 🤓

    0|0
    0|0
  • There is a definite difference between men and women.
    Women are great with "the now" situation, while men are great at "the long" situation. For Survivor, a lot of times, it is the men who come out on top more often than women.
    It is not that men are better at survival skills than women, it has to do with that men plan around the situation better. They know what to expect if they don't eat or have shelter, or don't have water. Men are also better when it comes to being around other men in a social climate. There will be disagreements, no one can avoid that, men just do better socially in that scenario.
    For women, they do better in fewer numbers and arguments are more likely to happen due to none of them wanting to give one person power. women also are less likely to think about long term consequences as was evident in the series. Not all women are like that, and that is same for men.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Show more from Guys
    19

Recommended Questions

Loading...