Are women people? by Niki2

... fully loaded, safety off...

Quote:
Originally posted by Oonjerah:

Pismo: I'll stick to what is actually observable.
Pismo: These fux enacting this crap don't care!

That, to me, would be the bottom line. The only way to protect women & children from bad legislation is to get the fux
out of office. Mostly, this will be at the state level. So my own responsiblity in this is to know my representatives and
discuss them publicly.

AKA: after bitching and defining the problem, take action.
Action has always been my weak point. In this, I allowed the fux to take office.

You are so not alone. It's hard to know what to do. Niki takes to the streets, that works for her and she's had plenty of practice so it fits. That's not me, not yet. I have called my congressmen, and called the white house even, and both times getting a pretty perplexed operator who was obviously there to run interference and be a kind of shrink. It's numbing to come face to face with our own weakness.

I keep thinking if only I had more time, but I probably have enough. It's like a lot of things: you just have to want it badly enough. If you do, you'll find a way.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 7:26 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

Bringing in a picture of an Orion woman is very appropo. Not only for the thread at large, but also for demonstrating the problems I see in society's treatment (and assumptions about) women.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 7:37 AM

... fully loaded, safety off...

For the record: I believe Orion women deserve the same rights and opportunities as Orion men.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 7:40 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
For the record: I believe Orion women deserve the same rights and opportunities as Orion men.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com]

Hello,

So do I. And I think they have an equal potential to be incarcerated in an institute for the criminally insane. ;-)

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 7:44 AM

Because I really feel it should be, needs to be, said again, especially in regards to socio-psychological "differences" mostly in the minds of posters and gender roles wholly created by society.

FEH!!!!

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 8:31 AM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Sigh.

I've always been wary of 'human nature' arguments, or any kind of political Darwinism 'natural selection' argument b/c 1) they tend to be promoted by self-interested groups as a rationalization for their own agenda, 2) people tend to see what they expect to see rather than what is there and 3) one can find exceptions that show nature doesn't dictate things have to be a particular way - eg the courtly dolphins, the alpha chimps on the pile of fruit, the reasonably peaceable baboons. And if I thought more I could probably come up with even more reasons.

However, there have to be differences between males and females b/c they really do have different biological roles. To say males and females are exactly the same is ignoring some very very big biological facts.

And to ignore those facts as a matter of political expediency doesn't lead to more knowledge, just more doctrine.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 8:36 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
To say males and females are exactly the same is ignoring some very very big biological facts.

And to ignore those facts as a matter of political expediency doesn't lead to more knowledge, just more doctrine.

Hello,

Saying that men and women are exactly the same, and saying that men and women have equal capacity for good and bad behavior, is not quite the same thing.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

Note to self: Mr. Raptor believes that women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.

Reference thread: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=51196

Never forget what this man is. You keep forgiving him his trespasses and speak to him as though he is a reasonable human being. You keep forgetting the things he's advocated. If you respond to this man again, you are being foolish.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 9:00 AM

Why was Mozart a child prodigy?
Why was John Nash schizophrenic?

When a baby is born, it is conscious, human. But is it a person yet?
By person, I mean does it have a sense of self, "I am." ?

Are all newborn brains identical standard issue and blank?
Aside from the obvious physical differences between newborns, are there also mental differences?

Later, will all children respond to the pressures of conditioning equally?
Or are we individuals from birth?

Is this post 100% OT?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 9:02 AM

BYTEMITE

It's not political doctrine, because I eschew politics in general, but it might be experience. I personally have never seen what you all see, that women act any different from men. And what I've read seems to suggest that there might be biological differences, but ultimately biological differences are different pathways to the same end behavioural result.

anyway, I have been soured on participating any further in this thread. But I actually do want to thank Frem, Anthony, and 1kiki, because I think they did a better job of explaining my positions than I did.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 10:35 AM

... fully loaded, safety off...

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Because I really feel it should be, needs to be, said again, especially in regards to socio-psychological "differences" mostly in the minds of posters and gender roles wholly created by society.

FEH!!!!

"posters" - Gee, could you be more vague? Did you really come in at the end of a long discussion just to score some cheap points? Fehk you too then.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 10:51 AM

... fully loaded, safety off...

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Quote:
To say males and females are exactly the same is ignoring some very very big biological facts.

And to ignore those facts as a matter of political expediency doesn't lead to more knowledge, just more doctrine.

Hello,

Saying that men and women are exactly the same, and saying that men and women have equal capacity for good and bad behavior, is not quite the same thing.

Please define - what does "capacity" have to do with it? I have the capacity to do a lot of things that I will never do. If the ledger on the man's side is so lopsided, can you show me a list of female actions that comes even remotely close?

These aren't capacities, these are actuals:

Rape - "Unofficially, based on the premise put forward by the National Institute of Crime Rehabilitation that only one in twenty rapes are reported, the figure is over 494,000 a year."
Male on Female Beatings
Human trafficking of women
Prostitution
Murdering 100's of thousands
Indoctrinated their children into female hate
80% of the time females are the full time parent in broken homes
Mutilation of females so they can take no pleasure in sex

Anthony, what's on the female side of the ledger? Do you have comparable capacities to show for them? I can't imagine how you can possible balance this out - are you as a male in denial?

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 1:18 PM

Violence is instinctive: Given two toddlers fighting over a toy, they are likely to hit and bite.
Conditioning: Some families will discourage violent behavior. Most succeed, I believe.

Violence is learned: If adults in a family are violent, the kids will learn it. There is a tendency
that the more a child has been hit, the more he/she wants to hit. And since that child was hit
repeatedly by someone much bigger, he/she may not choose a fair opponent to hit, but will tend to
bully those who are smaller or in any way incapacitated for self-defense.

Some bullies outgrow it. Some don't.

As we learn to suppress our urges for violence, we don't necessarily become nicer. Most of us still find
cause for anger and resentment. Many prefer not to play fair.
Thus Games People Play = a variety of emotional assaults and abuses. These also begin at home and are
enhanced and refined out in the world. It is a choice for all of us whether or not to be mean.

In the microcosm of my own life, women are more skilled at emotional abuse. Probably, I just know
more women than men. As for stamina in maintaining anger and aggression, I perceive men and women
as equals.

Healthy, mutually nurturing relationships ... insufficient data here. Sounds like a very good idea.

I expect myself to deal with life's hurts more appropriately as I mature. That means, if the problem
is in me, I want to deal with it internally. If my problem is with others, I hope to be forthright,
civil and honest with them. I don't like to fight. But it's way better than doormat.

I also expect myself to mellow out. It's not necessary to react to every little thing. If I find me
overreacting a lot, then I haven't cleaned house inside.

When it comes to good will and personal integrity, I like to think men and women are equal.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 1:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I think so, yes. And it's only rape and murder that are committed more often by males, other violent acts are by my understanding fairly evenly distributed. Women might make up for the less rapes or murders in some other horrible way, that is in a sense a form of violence.

But it's possible that the rape and murder thing might also be cultural. In a matriarchal society, women might be more inclined to rape and murder. Perhaps because it would be easier for them to get away with it, though I don't know how much that factors into male attempted rape in a patriarchal society. In certain societies it appears that it's a HUGE factor. In other societies it may be a less prominent factor than alienation or rejection or alpha assertation.

I definitely think we all have the same potential to be good OR horrible.

Some things I agree and some I definitely disagree. I agree that we all have potential to be good or horrible, but I think I said earlier, I believe men and women do things differently.

Although society plays some part in our differences, our physiology also plays a major part. Whether you don't like the idea, the truth is we have evolved for different purposes. Yes, both sexes have the capacity for aggression, we needed to have that capacity in order to survive. Yes, we both have the capacity to nurture infants. However, you cannot deny our differences in physiology and the impact that has on how each gender responds to certain stimuli.

Here are some of the ways we differ that I don't think will vary.

Fight or flight response - males will more likely respond with an aggressive response, women will more likely with a protective or flight response. This response is hard wired into our brain as an evolved response to protect us from danger and is not connected with higher brain functioning or learned behaviours. In fact, males and females have vastly different responses to stress factors, starting with the release of different hormones.

men and women produce completely different responses to visual sexual stimuli.

Quote:
Men are generally more interested in and responsive to visual sexually arousing stimuli than are women. Here we used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to show that the amygdala and hypothalamus are more strongly activated in men than in women when viewing identical sexual stimuli. This was true even when women reported greater arousal. Sex differences were specific to the sexual nature of the stimuli, were restricted primarily to limbic regions, and were larger in the left amygdala than the right amygdala. Men and women showed similar activation patterns across multiple brain regions, including ventral striatal regions involved in reward. Our findings indicate that the amygdala mediates sex differences in responsiveness to appetitive and biologically salient stimuli; the human amygdala may also mediate the reportedly greater role of visual stimuli in male sexual behavior, paralleling prior animal findings.

http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v7/n4/abs/nn1208.html

Difference in our we communicate - again using mri's and observing brains, women tend to use both hemispheres while most activity takes place in the left hemisphere of their brains.

There are probably a host of other physiological and neurological differences which inform male and female behaviour.

anecdotally (and I acknowledge this is poor science) most parents would tell you about the differences between their male and female offspring from a very early age. I also acknowledge that there are subtle ways that even tiny babies can be treated depending upon gender, but I don't think it accounts for the differences that can be seen, particularly in areas such as language and social skills (girls have more highly developed skills earlier) and spatial and mathematical (boys tend to do better).

Having said all this, of course there are variances within genders, but they tend to be exceptions rather than the rule.

I find there is a certain amount of defensiveness in your responses. Acknowledging difference does not mean you accept inequality or that you excuse bad behaviour in either gender.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 1:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

Hello,

Saying that men and women are exactly the same, and saying that men and women have equal capacity for good and bad behavior, is not quite the same thing.

--Anthony

In dealing daily with the gender divide, in what sometimes feels like an outright war, I would say again that both men and women can be horrible humans, they just do it very differently.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 1:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:

I think if you change the environment, you get very different results than you'd expect. I think we see this all the time, but discount it because environments that promote female violence are seen as rare and extreme.

I think we don't realize how much what we consider 'normal' environment impresses behavioral norms on people, creating a cycle of expectation and result. The expectation creates a result that confirms the expectation.

If women didn't have equal capacity for aggression then I don't think girl gangs would work out like they do. They'd just be capped out as 'mean girl' clubs where people verbally insult and ostracize one another.

--Anthony

I certainy think women have capacity for aggression, never said otherwise. I disagree that it would be equal capacity, and no matter what society you managed to create, you'd never see a half half situation arise for all the reasons I see above. But I think the gaps would close somewhat.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 1:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
"posters" - Gee, could you be more vague? Did you really come in at the end of a long discussion just to score some cheap points? Fehk you too then.

Will you buy me dinner first ?

Hint: I think your whole goddamn argument on both sides is completely bloody ridiculous from the very start, idiotic, lacking in essential biological facts, warped by ideology and the assumptions of a society so fucked up I consider it to be a fount of evil.

And you accomplished nothing WITH it.

So, again - FEH!!

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 3:59 PM

FEH to you too, sire.

I think the argument is an interesting one, even if it has gotten emotional.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 5:43 PM

HKCAVALIER

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
...it's only rape and murder that are committed more often by males, other violent acts are by my understanding fairly evenly distributed. Women might make up for the less rapes or murders in some other horrible way, that is in a sense a form of violence.

Folks,

This is the core of what's drivin' me bonkers in this thread. How is this notion anything but faith based? Why should nature create any such parity between genders? Rape and murder happen to be the most overtly destructive behavior in social animals and one segment of the population engages in 'em regularly and often--that is to say, historically and across many cultures--and t'other has stayed well out of it, by and large, for millennia. Why is it necessary to find "equivalent" evils in these two populations? How is it logical?

Sure there have been a handful--A HANDFUL--of evil queens in history, but they are as a feather counterbalancing gold ingots on the scales of gendered violence and tyranny. Where are the female fascist states of yor? Where are the cultures--outside of some pulp author's masochistic fever dream--where men were routinely castrated and their penises removed by high priestesses to keep them chaste?

Why assert that nature creates balance where no balance is visible and there is no data to support that nature has ever been in this particular way balanced? What in nature decides that women would balance out all the rapin' and murderin' with something just as nasty, but a ton more, what? Mysterious, covert, connivin'--this is itself a misogynistic line of thought. Outside of a profound wish that reality be a ton more mathematically pretty and manageable than it is, and equality be a far more childishly simple issue than it ever will be, where does this come from?

And please, I'm not saying that our societal norms are inborn. I don't agree with Pizmo's formulation of female = childcare, male = hunter. The socalled "hunter-gatherer" societies of prehistory were more truthfully just "gatherer" societies with some opportunistic hunting going on from time to time. All that stuff about "man, the hunter" was indeed largely invented by folks in the 50's who liked the idea.

I joined this discussion because I was seeing things getting polarized and the two poles were making less and less sense as they went along. I wanted to inject some much needed uncertainty/ambiguity into the debate. Yes, our society's notions of gender norms are atrociously maladaptive and straight up self-destructive. But that doesn't mean that there are no meaningful differences in how the two genders function or how the two genders think, as groups. Of course there are individual variations, but that doesn't tell me that looking at the two groups as a whole and making generalizations is an inherently corrupt undertaking. Plenty dangerous when such inquiry is done with an eye toward passing legislation, but in the persuit of truth, I just don't see the problem.

I'm down with saying that a lot of what's going on is indeed culturally based, that it is indeed the result of some diseased process in societies throughout history, but isn't it interesting that this disease has been so very widespread and has expressed itself so differently in men and women?

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 6:14 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

I really haven't been keep track of this thread, but just glancing through the posts, I think the reason why some women might be reluctant to acknowledge any difference between men and women is because it brings up the possibility that women will be biologically (which means... "forever") doomed to subservience because they are less aggressive, more easily frightened, or just overall more responsible then men.

Yes, there are aggressive women and there are tender-hearted men, but on the average- across many cultures and through many ages- men do appear to be the primary aggressors. So, in what way do we NOT translate this to permanent social inequity? Apologies if this has already been discussed.

It seems to me that the prevalence of certain traits depends on what is rewarded and how it is seen in societies. In societies where maximal physical effort is required, the large strong person will have an advantage. In societies where human-power had been replaced by electrical power, strength is not so important. We have a society that is drenched in interpersonal competition. It rewards "male" traits. If women played to their strength (cooperation) they could actually turn things around.

One last point: There is a chimpanzee tribe that became permanently (so far, at least) less aggressive. These chimps would raid the dumpsters behind a safari-restaurant for meat scraps. The most aggressive males would of course get the bulk of the meat, but as it turned out on one occasion the meat was tainted with TB and the aggressive males were infected and died. There was (apparently) rejoicing throughout the tribe, which quickly discouraged ANY reversion to aggression. This more peaceable was of behaving has lasted through several generations and also the integration of chimps from other tribes.

--------------

I also just want to bring up that the tendency to violence IS inborn IN SOME. But not all. I am an identical twin. All I remember feeling, when I was very young, is that I just wanted everyone to be happy. If it meant giving you my toy, I would be much happier giving you the toy and seeing YOU happy then keeping the toy and seeing you UNhappy. OTOH, my identical twin was a hellion. She would throw tantrums that made our parents think she was "touched", yanno? So babies are born with personalities, or at least response patterns. We're born on a bell curve. We also learn. Violence is also taught. So is peace.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 11, 2012 7:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
FEH to you too, sire.

I think the argument is an interesting one, even if it has gotten emotional.

I concede your point, for me it's been more of a *headdesk*-*facepalm* trainwreck to watch, but I guess others are gettin more out of it than I.

Oh, and on that knockin off the aggressive chimps thing and the other chimps all but laughing up their sleeve about it - humans accomplished that once upon a time in a pretty unpleasant way themselves.
His name was Robespierre.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 12, 2012 3:11 AM

... fully loaded, safety off...

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Will you buy me dinner first ?

Only if you promise to wear that cute jumper I like so much.

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Hint: I think your whole goddamn argument on both sides is completely bloody ridiculous from the very start, idiotic, lacking in essential biological facts, warped by ideology and the assumptions of a society so fucked up I consider it to be a fount of evil.

And you accomplished nothing WITH it.

So, again - FEH!!

I think you misunderstand my whole argument then or I've made a complete hash of stating it, but whatever. Fwiw - I have many of those same face palm moments when I read your posts about 9-11, only it's more shoulder shrug followed by a big eye roll.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 12, 2012 4:45 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Women are more human than men, imo.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, absolutely not. I refuse to allow you guys to regurgitate the same old crap that used to be said about women just because the pendulum is on the feminist side now.

I'm calling this nonsense. You guys are not inherently more aggressive, or more slave to your libido, or less wise or less common sensical or ANY of that.

You might have problem groups that deviate slightly from the norm, especially while drunk (and, I add here, "brah"), but so do women.

If all of us are to be responsible for our own destinies then we must acknowledge all of us are equally human.

Well obviously both men and women are human. But I would say that if anything there's a beter case for calling men 'inhuman' than there is women.

'Inhuman' does not just mean 'bad' or 'evil'; inhuman can also mean 'unfeeling'. I believe women are more empathetic than men - thus, one could say, more human.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 12, 2012 8:59 AM

Piz, I couldn't even UNDERSTAND your argument, but than that's prolly as much me as it is you, as the perspectives and thought processes are just too damn divergent to connect on the topic.

True of a lotta things, I guess, although why you'd insult me for dimissing your argument as irrelevant to any point *I* was trying to make (which it was, cause I was stickin to tactical, not moral, discussion) just seems odd - unless perhaps you got the idea I was dismissing you instead of an off-topic argument which seemed nonsensical to me.

Communication ain't never as easy as we pretend it is.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 12, 2012 9:37 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Thank you, Cav and Sig; you've made a number of points I tried (unsuccessfully, when debating Byte) to make. I agree with most of what both of you said, and it's been fascinating to see some of the opinions here, and how vociferously they were pushed forward. It sure got ugly, and I'm curious as to why. Why do people have so much invested in either proving men and women are different or that they're the same? I'm sure there's some psychological reason, but it's beyond me to figure out.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 12, 2012 11:21 AM

MY investment in proving men and women are different.

1. It's very sexy. Viva la différence!

2. Soothes the guilt. For many years I was submissive And hostile toward men. I didn't see myself as equal
and I acted accordingly. Lotta turmoil over claiming equality.

3. During the years that men were "better than me," I was jealous of them.

This issue may be very emotionally charged for all who can't shut up about it after they make their point.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 12, 2012 11:28 AM

MAL4PREZ

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Why do people have so much invested in either proving men and women are different or that they're the same? I'm sure there's some psychological reason, but it's beyond me to figure out.

Well, I have some inkling. Like Bytemite, (and all of us!) I am not a stereotypical "female". Yes, that's true of all women, just like no man is the exact stereotype of "male." But for some of us, I think it becomes a particularly sensitive issue.

If I got into detail it'd be a *really* long post, but the ways that I am not a normal female are pretty much in my face on a daily basis. If just about everyone I encountered *didn't* have these pre-conceived ideas of what I must be like, simply because of how I look and the kind of plumbing I've got, my life would be quite different. Call that whining if you like. Hey, in my world it's just reality. I have had to deal with gender issues in very real, very personal ways all my life.

To throw in my .02, though I'm late to the party and this thread has been done in already, I think this idea that men's and women's brain have different signatures, therefore men and women are inherently genetically different, is pure BS. Yes, there may be differences, but jesus are you aware of the training we undergo from day 1? The brain forms pathways as it develops, like how Chinese babies, if exposed to western languages before age 1, can pronounce "r". Otherwise, they can't. (I read that study once, sorry, ain't gonna go looking for it again.)

Show me studies of brains fresh out of the womb, and maybe you'll have a point. Differences in anyone over the age of one are a mix of genetics and experience, and the two cannot be separated. The only way to test it is to set up an alternate reality bubble where all the girl toys are muscular and packed in black, and all the boy toys are soft and pink, and males on TV cry openly and hug their friends and coo at babies while female characters swallow their emotions and get in confrontations and start wars, and girls are encouraged to get big and play football and full contact ice hockey while boys ought to be slender and wear skirts and have play whistled dead everytime they try to use their bodies to protect the ball (field hockey). Let's see what boys and girls are like in that world, then we'll talk.

However, I do think there is some inherent difference between the genders. Physically we're different, and the brain is tied to the physical world. That is undeniable. The degree of that difference, however, is something we absolutely cannot be sure of in this day and age, not with the extreme gender definitions that are forced on us from the moment the doctors wash off the slime and put a little blue or pink cap on our tiny bald heads.

I have to say one thing to Bytemite: remember how we had that email encounter once, where you were sure I was out to fight with you, and it took a lot of me throwing my hands up to convince you that I wasn't? I think that's happened here. Hon, I understand where you're coming from, but I think you're so afraid of being trod on about this that you're seeing disagreement where it doesn't exist. I don't think anyone was saying what you were hearing. I think you have more allies than you think.

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 12, 2012 11:49 AM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

"Physically we're different, and the brain is tied to the physical world. That is undeniable. The degree of that difference, however, is something we absolutely cannot be sure of in this day and age ..."

Maybe the thing to do is to study past and the few remaining matriarchies to see if matriarchal societies are significantly different from patriarchal societies, especially in terms of hierarchies, wealth distribution, violence, rape and war.

Musuo of China
Zapotec Indians of Juchitan
Minangkabaus of West Sumatra
Nagovisis of the island of South Bougainville
Machiguenga of Peru
Khasi and Garo of North-Eastern India

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 12, 2012 2:59 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
However, I do think there is some inherent difference between the genders. Physically we're different, and the brain is tied to the physical world. That is undeniable. The degree of that difference, however, is something we absolutely cannot be sure of in this day and age, not with the extreme gender definitions that are forced on us from the moment the doctors wash off the slime and put a little blue or pink cap on our tiny bald heads.

Thank you, Mal4. Also for

Quote:
I have to say one thing to Bytemite: remember how we had that email encounter once, where you were sure I was out to fight with you, and it took a lot of me throwing my hands up to convince you that I wasn't? I think that's happened here. Hon, I understand where you're coming from, but I think you're so afraid of being trod on about this that you're seeing disagreement where it doesn't exist. I don't think anyone was saying what you were hearing.

I haven't said anything for quite a while since Byte went after ME, and I'm not sure what's behind it, but reading this thread it sure seems like Byte's having some kind of difficulty discussing the issue unemotionally, and her emotions seem out of proportion to the issue at hand. Do you realize just how many of us you've gone after in this thread, Byte? RESPECTFULLY, I know you've said in the past that sometimes you lose perspective, and it seems to me like this thread might be one of those times. Just my observation from what I've read since you had a whack at me and I shut up. NO offense intended, please don't bite my head off again. Or go ahead and do so, I'm just offering an opinion. This thread has been quite something!

ETA p.s., Mal4, if you'd care to go into detail on "the ways that I am not a normal female", I would love to hear. Given my height, which makes me "big" and the fact that I ride motorcycles at 60+, worked in wild animal rehab, my voice is low, I don't "dress" like a "girl", etc., I've always felt that way (hell, I've had people at checkout counters who don't look carefully at me say "have a good day sir", etc.). For me it's as much my OWN mentality in not wanting to be a "normal" female as it is my physical appearance, but I'm always curious about others who encounter the same sort of stuff.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 12, 2012 3:56 PM

I'll bet plenty of people took issue with your non-conformity when you were younger.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 12, 2012 4:00 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Actually, no. Remember, I hit my "stride" in the '60s, as a hippie. Before that I was VERY shy, learned to hunch over to minimize my height, and NEVER went to a school dance!

And I live in California. If anyone had any problems with me, they never said nuttin', 'cuz I never heard about it.

I've always said it's a good thing I wasn't born in a small town in the Midwest, 'cuz I'd have been tarred, feathered and run out of town on a rail! I actually don't think that's too far off the mark...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 12, 2012 4:28 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I've never been a girly-girl - I'm tall, muscular and active (at least until I got old and in constant pain), dressing in jeans, polo tops and sneakers - at the same time I've had more than enough male attention. So much so that I feel like I've had to go out of my way to prove myself as a professional in a traditionally male field, and generic non-sexual person. It sometimes makes interpersonal interactions strenuous even at work - they keep trying to put me in an expected mold. Just a round peg in a square hole, I guess.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 12, 2012 5:42 PM

I believe most folks prefer to stereotype, 'cause it's easier.
But it's more fun to be and associate with individuals.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 12, 2012 8:45 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

I thought the article was kind of whingy too Byte, I did enjoy the humor in it though, about the lunchtime cat videos and how which ones to watch are a choice, and choices are good etc. I think you're really invested in the idea that man and women are completely the same. This is obviously something that is important to you and I think I know why.

There is lots of variation among men. There is lots of variation among women. There is lots of variation among men and women, ergo among people. Some of this variation is environmental, some is genetic or innate. Are their differences between many men and many women? I think there are, most anyone would agree. Are those differences (aggression levels, attitudes and drives for sex, nurturer tendencies etc.) genetic or environmental? The answer is yes, meaning they're both and it would be quite difficult to figure out which is more the case because they're so tangled together that it would be difficult to sipher it out. And when studies are done that come out one way or the other people get angry and weird about it, so what's the point? Does it really matter why many men do certain things or why many women do certain things? I posite that it doesn't really matter and that the important thing is that we're all people.

I do think that men are often more aggressive than women, I do think that men often have more intense physicality that is more easily aroused. But Not Always.

Byte, you're really mad at Pismo aren't you.

Signe, I've heard that that's common with twins, for one to be quite complient and one to be very rowdy and fractious.

Circumsition: I don't think its so bad. Men can still have fun when they rut, whereas when girls are victims of gm it dominishes their pleasure in rutting notably, plus they can't take care of their own needs on their own because that's a big thing that the clitorus is for too.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 13, 2012 12:33 AM

What is odd about this thread is that most everyone is saying the same things.

I think everyone agrees

Women are people and deserve to be treated as such
Men and women have different physiologies
Some (most?) of the differences between genders can be accounted for by social conditioning
Differences should not mean women should be treated with inequity
Men and women can both behave badly
Men and women can both be aggressive

I am not sure what all the emotion is about

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 13, 2012 1:28 AM

Me neither Magons, me neither...

In fact given that I consider all of what you just said so bloody obvious is why I reacted so dismissively to what amounted in my eyes to needless hostile nitpicking.

WHY people get up in arms about some things kinda mystifies me.

-Frem

PS. I feel much the same about the whole climate change thing too, since it boils down for me to waste not, want not, and don't trash your living space, but everyone else...wheeewie.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 13, 2012 6:56 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Magons, yes, I think we've pretty much all agreed on the points you made. The one that's not there, and which is what most confused me about Byte's responses is that "men and women are different". It seemed to me that she's been insisting, and debating with points I find faulty, that there is virtually NO difference. Circumcision is a prime example...to say that it is exactly equal to what's done to young women totally mystifies me, among others of her remarks.

Riona, I agree with what you said, and I think it's well put. It's not just Pizmo she's been pissed at, she went after me for quite a while back there, too. Although from what she wrote, apparently she had been attributing what Pizmo wrote to me, so maybe it does go back to him. That's why it bothered me when she wrote that she'd been trolling us all through this thread. If that's what she really meant, then she wasted my time, wasn't having a real discussion here at all, and I consider that real trolling and despicable.

At the time, like Magons, I too couldn't understand why she was so vehement and attacking and it puzzled me, which is why I dropped out of the discussion.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 13, 2012 7:18 AM

BYTEMITE

I'm stepping back in here to say that I was being sarcastic. The comment above to HKCav about trolling was sarcastic, which lead to the comment in the other thread, which was also sarcastic. Obviously I have an opinion on this topic, or I wouldn't have gone on this long, and it wouldn't have seemed so "vehement" to you all.

I admit that I behaved badly in this thread. Some of you I apologized to. I won't apologize to some others because I don't "deserve" what they said to me. I won't apologize for my interpretation of the science.

I also won't continue to post to this thread, and as such will not address the posts made since I left the first time.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 13, 2012 4:35 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

What Magon's said, that sums it all up quickly and easily and most of us are in complete agreement as she said.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 15, 2012 5:08 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Ah, I see. Given what you said in the other thread, I thought your apology had been to all. I'm guessing I'm left off this apology, tho' I don't know what I said that you didn't deserve, as I was trying to be as diplomatic as I could most of the time, but I accept what you say about not apologizing and will keep it in mind. I'm sad you found nothing you wrote to me worthy of apology, but I'm grateful to have found out you were at least having a real discussion here. Thinking you were playing us bothered me; I'm glad it wasn't true.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 15, 2012 10:58 AM

Am I a person? When did I become a person?

I don't quite want to do this, to visit the bad times.

When I was so much younger than now, I was hurt and confused. I needed so much from others.
I needed their love, acceptance, approval, which, even when it was given, I was not able to have.
Others could manipulate and hurt me so easily! I was no challenge. I was a PUPPET!

What trait in me caused my puppethood? Reactivity.
I put Their expressed opinions above My own inner knowledge.
I was always reacting. And as such, I could create nothing from my own being.
They pushed my buttons. I let my buttons be pushed was entirely my own doing.

One day, my baby brother said, "Oonj! The name of the game is to ACT, not ReAct!"
I heard it.

So I set about recreating myself as a real person instead of a puppet.
It didn't happen fast. It took a clear head and a lot of work.

Free Will isn't Free. You have to work like hell for it.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 15, 2012 11:12 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Wow, Oonj, that sounds exactly like me up until a few years ago! I'm not sure if I've become a "real person", or even what that means, but I'm certainly less reactive, and I thank buddhism for that. A little perspective goes a long way, and attempting to see those who would harm me as people just as flawed as I has helped a lot, too.

I think the "work" you mention, for me, has been what we call "mindfulness". I've still got a long ways to go, tho', I know that!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 15, 2012 12:29 PM

MAL4PREZ

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
ETA p.s., Mal4, if you'd care to go into detail on "the ways that I am not a normal female", I would love to hear.

Sorry, haven't had much time in the past few days, but wrote this on the train today. It's long, but this is something I could use a vent about. I have a few years of new observations on the matter that I've never shared with anyone.

BTW, I might be inviting replies of: “Really, you think your problem is what?!?! You asshole!” Oh well, bring it on. I'm a scientist. It's observation based.

I am not a “normal” female: I don't ask for directions - as a rule! I'm not chatty. I don’t like talking on the phone. I hate the mall. I don't go orgasmic over chocolate. I hate date movies and most TV sitcoms (like Friends, shows that rely on behavior that has nothing to do with me.) I am logical to a fault and very good at math and science. I've got a touch of the Asperger's, though that was more apparent in high school and college and less so now. When it comes to words, my brain doesn’t connect to my mouth real well.

I have not gotten along with most women I’ve known. I don't understand them and their social rules. I don't know what the hell they talk about all the time. I don't want babies, I don't want to coo at babies, I am not out to get married. I love sports, especially ice hockey, which I played almost every day for several years. I spit. I farmer blow on the ice. (It's necessary!)

OK, so I'm a tomboy, right? Well, I’m also quite girly in many ways. I love skirts and anything that sparkles. Jane Austen – love her! Pretty dresses – yay! High heels – would wear them if my feet could take more than 30 seconds playing in the shoe store. I am quite serious about ballet and modern dance, which I started in college. And, well, I look like a girl, even when I try not to. Not big boobs, thank goodness, but, well… more about this below.

I did grow up in the Midwest, where I was criticized to my face for not wearing make-up, nice clothes, or doing my hair. I'd go to school with my hair still dripping from the shower. I wore torn up sweats. I remember thinking: of course no one wants to date me when I look like this. But I didn't care enough to change my habits. I was more interested in other things.

So here's what I only figured out decades later - this behavior of mine was unforgivable in a particular way because I am tall and skinny and somewhat pretty. OK, I really don’t think I’m gorgeous, but years of watching how people react to me makes me believe that others tend to find me good-looking. Even model-esque, I hear.

But in my formative years I was shy, socially awkward, and in many behaviors masculine. This mix alienated folks. They didn't know what to make of me, so they didn't like me. Being "abrasive", I did nothing help them get over the bad first impression. Some people, especially women, seemed to make it their mission to tear me down in any way possible.

In grad school (on the East Coast, thank TPTB!) I made myself unfeminine. Died my hair black, dressed like a homeless person (according to my mom), got pierced, tattooed, etc. I had to let people know not to expect "normal" from me. This is also when I had my ice hockey addiction. I escaped the Midwest! It was quite liberating.

In the past few years, I have moved on from that a bit. I've gotten back into dancing (with the occasional hockey tourney thrown in for variety) I wear earrings and makeup and nice designer clothes. Mom would be proud! My lesbian friends, however, don’t all seem such fans. Some lesbian friends-of-friends seem eager to oust anyone who's not obviously non-eminine, so to speak. I've been a bit shunned by that crowd. *sigh*

I think the biggest way gender assumptions affect me these days is that I do not date (for my own reasons which you might know from prior conversations, Niki). This leads to the problem that I am basically a 40 year good looking, talented, single woman who prefers the friendship of men—taken men especially, so they won’t try to date me. However, that is socially unacceptable because of the assumption that I’m some couguar with a biological clock on the prowl. Sooo not the case.

So, in deciding to not be romantically involved, I've also had to accept not having many friends. I'm not butch enough to be in with the lesbians, not wedded and impregnated enough to bond with my female peerage, too girly (sexy?) to hang with the guys, and not socially skilled enough to overcome any these obstacles.

Woe is me! *flings arm over forehead*

No really, if it really bugged me I'd makes changes. I very well know the rest of it wouldn’t matter if I’d make a genuine effort to get out there and bond with people. I'm anti-social enough to prefer being a loner. But I am sometimes sad about the friendships I don’t have, because I’m so weird.

I haven’t even gotten into the issues of being a woman scientist. That’s a whole 'nother post!

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 15, 2012 12:30 PM

Recreating myself ...

It's an inside job.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 15, 2012 6:56 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Mal4 - I guess what I read is that while you're diverse you don't have too many internal contradictions (it's possible to like opposite this AND that, bling AND ice hockey, without the this and that impulses hating each other), but that your set of characteristics defies easy categorization by others, leading to confused and incomplete interactions with them. For example, your looks may trigger a typical male-type response from men, but your lack of sexual interest and Asperger demeanor could stymie two potential (and common) paths for interaction - sexual and emotional.

Perhaps I'm not getting what you posted, but it comes across to me that it's not you in the sense that your unique character isn't either hostile to itself or others, it's them. They just can't figure out how to relate to your unique being.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 15, 2012 8:12 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

What Kiki said sounds good, maybe everyone else are the ones with the problem, there's got to be some nice people out there who could just be your friends and not be weird about it, the trick seems to be finding those people. You seem nice enough to me, you have interests that vary, you do work that you enjoy, you're not scary or anything. Maybe those right friends for you are out there and just haven't crossed your path yet.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 16, 2012 2:11 AM

AGENTROUKA

Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:

BTW, I might be inviting replies of: “Really, you think your problem is what?!?! You asshole!” Oh well, bring it on. I'm a scientist. It's observation based.

I am not a “normal” female: I don't ask for directions - as a rule! I'm not chatty. I don’t like talking on the phone. I hate the mall. I don't go orgasmic over chocolate. I hate date movies and most TV sitcoms (like Friends, shows that rely on behavior that has nothing to do with me.) I am logical to a fault and very good at math and science. I've got a touch of the Asperger's, though that was more apparent in high school and college and less so now. When it comes to words, my brain doesn’t connect to my mouth real well.

I have not gotten along with most women I’ve known. I don't understand them and their social rules. I don't know what the hell they talk about all the time. I don't want babies, I don't want to coo at babies, I am not out to get married. I love sports, especially ice hockey, which I played almost every day for several years. I spit. I farmer blow on the ice. (It's necessary!)

Could it be that the expectations and boxes and labeling go both ways, though? Because what you're comparing yourself to seems less like a "normal woman" and more like the stereotype of one. And not in a good way.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 16, 2012 6:03 AM

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 16, 2012 6:13 AM

MAL4PREZ

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Mal4 - I guess what I read is that while you're diverse you don't have too many internal contradictions (it's possible to like opposite this AND that, bling AND ice hockey, without the this and that impulses hating each other), but that your set of characteristics defies easy categorization by others, leading to confused and incomplete interactions with them. For example, your looks may trigger a typical male-type response from men, but your lack of sexual interest and Asperger demeanor could stymie two potential (and common) paths for interaction - sexual and emotional.

That's pretty much spot on. Couldn't say it better myself!

Quote:
Perhaps I'm not getting what you posted, but it comes across to me that it's not you in the sense that your unique character isn't either hostile to itself or others, it's them. They just can't figure out how to relate to your unique being.

Well, and I'm quite good at pleasantly keeping people at a distance. But I don't take hesitation or confusion about me personally these days, which is a great improvement over my former approach: to assume that everyone just hated me for reasons I would never be able to fathom.

Riona: Yes, there are good people out there, and I am close to a few of them, but they are scattered about the country and I don't see them often. Moving back to NYC was a way to look for some new ones. Good place for weirdos to meet. :)

BTW, I was a little hard on the lesbian crowd in that post because I've been thinking lately of a particular friendship that went sour. The hockey crowd I've found in NY, which is maybe 50/50 on the sexual orientation, is about the friendliest bunch of women I've ever met. Really.

AR: Absolutely, I was making a comparison to the stereotype - on purpose! A shocking amount of our culture is aimed at that stereotype, which is why I find most popular culture completely annoying. The part of the country I grew up was pretty damned tied to stereotypes, so comparing myself to it wasn't something I could opt out of when I was young and impressionable. And clearly, some of that training remains.

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 16, 2012 8:00 AM