|Men and women equal?||eschelon|
May 29, 2003 6:42 AM
|I've always grown up belieiving that women are just as capable as men in doing anything. In most normal households, we are raised to believe in equality of the sexes. But are men and women really so?
This example may be oversimplified...but for the sake of argument, bear with me. I'm sure most of you are familiar with Chess. This is game that people of low intellect cannot play with success. You really have to have it together in order to play this game. My father always said to me that if women are so equal to men in intellect, why haven't there been any women chess champions? In fact, why is it that in all endeavors just about all of the recipients of the highest accolades men? And really, I don't buy that whole cultural brainwashing thing...where women are conditioned to want to do the laundry and go shopping thing.
I'm curious to read your differing viewpoints on this.
|Its no wonder you hate your mother||moneyman|
May 29, 2003 6:49 AM
|Looks like your father did as well. If he thinks of women as universally inferior in intellect, what message do you think he was conveying to you?
The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
May 29, 2003 7:00 AM
|seem to be having a bad day..chill, think of some soothing images...|
|My day is fine, thank you||moneyman|
May 29, 2003 7:21 AM
|It's still a telling post. Maybe you and eschelon should should go to www.misogynists.com and share some of these unique perceptions about women.
|Man, you are very very stupid.||eschelon|
May 29, 2003 8:34 AM
|My thread was about hearing differnt viewpoints than my own. I solicited these viewpoints from everyone. You instead offered none, except some snide remark to insult me. I think you need to go to remedial reading school...or stop reading these threads altogether...you are too damn "emotional".|
|I'm concerned as well||53T|
May 29, 2003 9:05 AM
|Moneyman's responses have been very dark and lacking any normal thought processes lately. He obviously was getting a different message in his mind as his eyes were reading your post. I too encourage him to take a break, find his center, come back to earth.|
|Your concern touches me deeply||moneyman|
May 29, 2003 9:09 AM
|You and eschelon make a great pair.
|Master's "tolerance" is boundless.||eyebob|
May 29, 2003 12:29 PM
|Didn't you know that?
|From what I have read...||ClydeTri|
May 29, 2003 6:58 AM
|From articles I have read, and I am not a doctor, apparently men and women are "wired" differently. Note I said differently, not better or worse. There are differnt ways of thinking, such as spatial, mathematical, etc. Men tend to think one way, women another, again, one is not necessarily better than the other, just different. And this is also a generalization as it is most likely some type of curve with overlapping areas. And undoubtly, socialization does play some role in it, how much, who knows...|
|Exactly! Well said.||jesse1|
May 29, 2003 8:42 AM
|We are ALL equal. And most of us different! Take gymnastics as an example. On the balance beam, teenage girls rule. On the still rings, it's men in their early twenties. Is one sex superior to another? Nope, just different.
Same goes with everyday endevours. In teaching, how many men teach kindergarten? Sure, some do, but the majority are women. Maybe because women are more suited to dealing with young children as mothers (I don't know). It's easier to find a male teaching self defense/combat becuase men or naturally more agressive. Naturally there are exceptions to nearly every activity. Just as there are male nurses in the medical field, in a sport dominated by men, the world record holder on a motorcycle in the 1/4 mile is a woman.
|not oversimplfied. more like idiotic||mohair_chair|
May 29, 2003 7:24 AM
|Your father sounds like a real genius to have figured out the whole chess thing.
Have you considered that maybe it's not about intellect? Maybe no women have become chess champions because they are too busy with other things to learn the game, what with all that shopping they do, and those hair and nail appointments, all those damned soap operas they watch. When can a girl find the time to learn the nuances of the Dutch Stonewall vs. the Brazilian Defense?
|This is the most intelligent response. You are a genius! nm||eschelon|
May 29, 2003 8:37 AM
|The problem is that the judge will be bias||Spoiler|
May 29, 2003 1:36 PM
|Your father, a man, judged chess to be a worthy measure of superiority, so the whole process is bias from the start. Why did your father judge chess to be a good measuring stick? It's my opinion that many men would do the same, and it's part of a man to do so.
I think that men and women have very different ideas about what's important.
If you think a certain thing is important, you would in turn think that thing is a good way to judge superiority or inferiority.
If you think sports competition is important, you'll tend to think that sports competition is a good measure of a human's relative superiority or inferiority compared to other humans. If sports are the measuring stick, men are superior.
If you think the ability to get another human to gawk and drool over another human is important, you'll think those who get others to drool are superior. In this case, you'd have to say women are superior.
If you think the ability to get other people to buy you things is important, you might think that those who can get others to buy them things are superior. Once again, you'd have to say women are superior.
If you think the ability to work at a frusterating computer program without smashing the machine with a sledgehammer is important, once again, women would probably be judged to be superior.
In the end,if I can accept, laugh at, and respect the differences, without turning every aspect of life into a battle of the sexes, things go pretty well.
Women have been repressed for quite a while. Part of the growing pains society is going through involves denying some repression and also reading repression into situations where it doesn't exist.
|Better question for you||Kristin|
May 29, 2003 2:01 PM
|How many women have played chess on a competition level, and how many men have played it. I believe that it is a game more often chosen by men and therefore it will naturally produce more top level competitors that are men. Perhaps the only gender influence with chess is that chicks aren't as drawn to it for some reason.
Personally, I can't stand the game. Particularly because I can't stand sitting still for that long, that quietly, and having to sort through so many possibilities. But you can put me in a game of cards any day.
|And another thought...||Kristin|
May 29, 2003 2:17 PM
|Perhaps it doesn't have as much to do with actually physiology as it does cultural roles. How many fathers teach chess to their daughters AND their sons? And how many mothers play chess. Even though there is much more gender equality now than 30 years ago, there are still separate roles for women and men. Little girls still play with barbies and little boy's their action figures. Girls and boys might both learn to do the laundy with mom. But who does the laundry in your house? Probably mom. Its not right or wrong, its just part of our culture.
Lets look at another example--one that's more physically challenging. Say...bike racing. The way the sport is structured, men achieve much higher standards than the women. And very few woman can compete at the top level WITH the men. BUT... What if women played a solely dominant role in our culture for over 100 years, and were the only participants in sports. Then after the 100 years, you begin to allow men to play sports. Would the sport be structured differently than it is now, to accomidate the strengths of women? Do you think men would have a fair chance competeing in that environment? (Remember, the sport would not be based on their strengths, but on womens.) I wonder if we are even unaware of the particular strengths and abilities of women in sports. All of today's sports were designed by men, with men in mind, and most of them for men alone.
Okay, I'm rambling here. I know I have a point; but I'm not sure what it is. Talk amongst yourselves.
May 29, 2003 7:55 PM
|Just how could bike racing be structured in a woman's favor? You got me wondering...
Your mention of roles reminded me of an informal survey I did recently where, in automobiles occupied by a man and a woman, I noted who was driving and who was the passenger - in over 80% of the cars I counted, the man was driving.
So now let's start a new survey: which task is more tiring - doing the laundry or doing chauffeur duty?
|You have thorough impressed me...||eschelon|
May 30, 2003 7:46 AM
|seriously, I'm not blowing sunshine here. Many took this thread of mine and got really emotional with personal attacks and namecalling.
I asked for differing viewpoints and that's exactly what you gave me...good ones at that. It's just like with lawyers in law school doing debates...it's not about what you believe, it's about each side exploring all possible viewpoints and angles to discover to arrive at the "truth" or consensus of fact and opinion.
Both men and women may be wired differently, but you really have to wonder, if women had taken the dominant role as men in the last few thousand years, would the tables be turned around? Personally, I believe that genetics is not a product of itself...rather, genetics is the product of social and environmental stimuli.
|I'm actually very good at chess.||Spinchick|
May 30, 2003 4:44 AM
|And my husband does all the shopping.
That's my viewpoint.
|I do the laundry:)-||Jon Billheimer|
May 30, 2003 8:01 AM
|And my wife's pretty good at chess! Life is hard. I should never have let her put on shoes or get out of the kitchen:)-|
|Yeah, what were you thinking? ;-) nm||Spinchick|
May 30, 2003 1:00 PM
|Hehe, I know a couple who||Kristin|
May 30, 2003 8:02 AM
|He is pretty emotional and she is very logical and level headed. He wants to talk, but she'd rather finish watching the game.|
|Very similar here...||Spinchick|
May 30, 2003 1:01 PM
|except he wants to talk and I want to ride my bike.|
May 30, 2003 1:52 PM
|The idea of equality is a dynamic one, and throught the evolution of feminist doctrine, it has changed dramatically, to where, I believe it should now reside.
My understanding of basic fem. theory:
1st wave- aimed at getting the social barriers that hinder women eg. lack of a vote, removed
2nd wave- was the most radical, and what people commonly assume represents all of feminist thought, that men and woman are the same, they are homogenious and devoid of any difference or inequality with the exception of the obviouse biological ones.
3rd wave- Notes that women and men are not the same, nor are all men the same, as all women are not the same. Rather it encourages the celebration of difference between individuals and the equal treatment of all.
That, the 3rd wave philosophy, would argue that men and women although differnt, are equal. Not equal in the sense that they are the same, but equal in the sense they they each deserve the same recognition and respect for their particular skills, abilities, asperations and roles.
I happen to agree
|The Vagina Monologues||purplepaul|
May 30, 2003 3:24 PM
|I would not want to spend much time with people who'd disagree with your third wave, but there are plenty who do.
In the Vagina Monologues, a mainstream and well received play, an underage girl is told that it is better to be raped by another woman than to have sex with a man.
Then there are the "scholars" who teach that all sexual intercourse with a man is rape. These people teach at some of the best universities in America. That they aren't laughed out of academia is sad, IMO.
So, I'm not sure that I'd agree with you that feminism has reached that third wave just yet. Rather, what I see from many of the people I spend time with is hostility between the sexes. Men say, "You know how women are, they can't..." and women say similar things. It's scary because it seems so ubiquitous. However, I do know a few people who are not like that, so I know it doesn't have to be. Plus, my own experiences with women have been remarkably (in comparison to many of the men I hear) positive.
But I don't like where all this mutual hostility seems to be heading.
|Feminism is not about equality anymore||Starliner|
May 30, 2003 5:40 PM
|Feminism has shifted its focus from equality toward the maximization of choice (for women). By changing the subject, men are left shouldering our many societal burdens without further discussion. What about us, we say as the government takes our children away and transforms us into a distant phantom, sentencing us to years of financial support because, hey, what choice did we have in the marriage but to bring home the bacon; and then making it near impossible to get a break should your income go down, or you lose your job. Why isn't there an automatic time limit on alimony, as there is on unemployment...
I think the hostility between the sexes you have noticed is going to increase until men realize what it is that is bothering us, and then stand up and demand the kinds of societal change that need to be done, in the interest of fairness to all.
|Feminism is up to each feminist i suppose....||sctri|
May 30, 2003 5:55 PM
|The issue of custody rights is a whole nother can of worms.
I was mostly just suggesting that the concept of feminism is often construed as large boned, short haired angry women blameing men for everything and that does not encompas much/if any of reality.
However, there are still very hardcore 2nd-wavers, who do and say things that hinder the progress of both men and women in false fights for equality.
Regardless, I think that if individuals, men and women look at the positives that eachother bring to the world rather than complain about stereotypes of an entire gender, much of that conflict and tenson could be avoided.
Got a problem with the man or woman that are dating or interacting with, it would be best to deal with them, and their/your problem instead of pinning it on whats in their pants.
|But some of their leaders aren't helping much.||purplepaul|
May 30, 2003 6:30 PM
|Having tenured professors at Ivy League universities does not marginalize the hostility. Rather, it paints all womyn as victims and men as the oppressor. It'd be bad enough if some fringe cheering section from far outside the left espoused this; instead, the proponents are Broadway plays and college professors.
A comparison can be made to reparations for blacks. If it were only the wackos calling for it, it would go nowhere. Throw in some professors and congressmen, and suddenly the argument starts to make sense to a lot of people. If recognized leaders stood up and said, "this is not right nor is it good for us" instead of pandering to hot button politics, race relations couldn't help but be better.
You offer sound advice for two people in a relationship, but what I'm seeing is that many of those around aren't able to do that because they have such powerful ideas of what the opposite sex is/must/should be like. This is a sad revelation for me because I wasn't raised that way. And when I point out what I see, the reception I get is not, shall we say, positive. Instead, I get arguments that say way more about a person's wounded ego than anything that can be extrapolated to include an entire sex. But they don't see it, and it's getting more common, in my experience.
May 30, 2003 7:04 PM
|I dont think that the womyn movement is gaining a stong foothold in mainstream society as high level acidemics support every possible idea or ideal on the spectrum of wacko.
The biggest issue is that I dont think that this small hardline minority appeals to enough of the FEMALE population, which relegates them to the status of wacko.
Professors who see the world as one oppressive fallic symbol after another serve only to show the extreme side of the issue, which does not appeal/matter/touch the greater population.
Its one thing to read "second sex" and have question the world arround you as a woman, its another thing entirely to cast off all of the other socialization and expectaions to the point there gender to gender interaction becomes so strained that it borders on impossible.
The average man or woman simply doesnt have the time, money, or interest in pursuing these pursuits, and go about their lives treating people how they are treated, not how an ivy league prof demands.
|I disagee, too.||purplepaul|
May 31, 2003 11:21 AM
|If only one or two academic institutions gave voice to the womyn's movement, I would agree with you. If an off off Broadway play extolling the benefits of woman on girl rape closed within a week, I'd agree with you.
Unfortunately, the womyn's movement seems to be seeping into mainstream society. Women who voice opinions contrary to the "womyn are victims" mantra are labeled traitors or far right zealots.
I went out for three years with a woman who graduated from Yale, and the level of animosity present in her and her friends towards men was astounding. It seems their experience at Yale taught them that men are stuffy old farts with no sense of humor and, furthermore, that womyn are better off without them. One can only imagine the self-hatred they must feel for "needing" a man. Indeed, my ex and most of her female college friends had sex with each other. Although none claimed to be lesbians, one did claim that she used to be. When they got together for girl's night out, they amused each other with talk about the most intimate details of their sex lives (from what my ex told me about them, and from what I assumed they knew about me, I felt uncomfortable meeting these people afterwards). When I mentioned this to a female friend recently, she said girls always do that! I sure hope not, but I can't argue with what she claimed.
Anyway, when I expressed some discomfort at her and her friend's claimed motivation for their lesbian dallying, I was accused of being "uptight" and trying to inflict my male dominance over their female freedom. Granted, this is one person and her circle of friends. But I think it speaks to the level of influence professors have and how it translates to real life. The problem is that hatred of men is not seen as a bad thing; rather, it is celebrated.
"What kind of country is this where the only person I can hate is a rich, white man?"
King Of the Hill
I hope my ex has changed. I did my best while I was with her and after we stopped seeing each other (she called a few times to see if we could reconcile) to show her that she had gotten me quite wrong. She seemed to finally get it after it was too late. Too bad. In spite of all I've said, she had some really wonderful qualities. She's now a doctor, married, living down south.
|Well, you have had a different....||sctri|
Jun 1, 2003 5:32 PM
|set of ex-periances than I have, and I suppose that you are entitled to your opinion, but I still think that scholars and even the art (plays included) push the boundries far beyond what normal, rational regular society believes and practices.|| |