Saudi princess: What I'd change about my country (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17446831)
QuotePrincess Basma Bint Saud Bin Abdulaziz tells the BBC there are many changes she would like to see in Saudi Arabia - but that now is not the time for women to be allowed to drive.
I speak as the daughter of King Saud, the former ruler of Saudi Arabia. My father established the first women's university in the kingdom, abolished slavery and tried to establish a constitutional monarchy that separates the position of king from that of prime minister. But I am saddened to say that my beloved country today has not fulfilled that early promise.
Our ancient culture, of which I am very proud, is renowned for its nobility and generosity, but we lack, and urgently need, fundamental civil laws with which to govern our society.
As a daughter, sister, (former) wife, mother, businesswoman and a working journalist, these are the things that I would like to see changed in Saudi Arabia...
The rest of the article goes on to detail the 5 things she would change.
Her hope and determination are admirable. Though I am so unsure anything will ever change in that country... :(
Quote from: Sweetdeath on April 11, 2012, 07:23:20 AM
Her hope and determination are admirable. Though I am so unsure anything will ever change in that country... :(
Given the power current power structure in Saudi Arabia and the general radicalization Islam is undergoing these ideas are probably to radical to advance far. But one can hope.
So twisted that these are our "allies".
Quote from: Firebird on June 08, 2012, 03:10:42 PM
So twisted that these are our "allies".
A situation well 'lubricated' by the oil issue.
So true. When's that kid going to finish the nuclear fusion plant already? :)
Not much to praise, but at least a small start..........The Saudis will have two female athletes at the Olympic games. This has never happened before. One of the women will compete in Judo, the other in track. I do not know whether they will compete while shrouded in their head scarves. The judo contestant will be required to wear a judo gi (standard unifiorm) that is part of the standing rules of shiai. (shiai is the contest of one opponent against the other) The head scarf would probably be allowed but it may be dislaced accidentally during the contest
.
The Saudis, along with the rest of the strict Islamists who subjugate females, are clearly crapping in their mess kits. They are leaving one of their most valuable resources to be cloistered, suppressed, wasted.
Our CIA has many women operatives who are, on balance, more efficient than men. (male chauvinist pigs like me take no pleasure in this reality) In the words of a high ranking male CIA project leader; women do not waste time telling war stories, or go outside the building to smoke cigarettes, they are shrewd and insightful in ways that men are not.
Some of the key decision makers in the ultra- extremely well planned and orchestrated take down of Osama Bin Laden were women. One in particular was Michelle Flournoy who was a top level researcher, mission plotter, black widow, and overall wizard who had Obamas ear. The Islamists are plainly stupid for their attitude toward women.
Quote from: Icarus on July 16, 2012, 02:24:11 AM
Not much to praise, but at least a small start..........The Saudis will have two female athletes at the Olympic games. This has never happened before. One of the women will compete in Judo, the other in track. I do not know whether they will compete while shrouded in their head scarves. The judo contestant will be required to wear a judo gi (standard unifiorm) that is part of the standing rules of shiai. (shiai is the contest of one opponent against the other) The head scarf would probably be allowed but it may be dislaced accidentally during the contest
.
The Saudis, along with the rest of the strict Islamists who subjugate females, are clearly crapping in their mess kits. They are leaving one of their most valuable resources to be cloistered, suppressed, wasted.
Our CIA has many women operatives who are, on balance, more efficient than men. (male chauvinist pigs like me take no pleasure in this reality) In the words of a high ranking male CIA project leader; women do not waste time telling war stories, or go outside the building to smoke cigarettes, they are shrewd and insightful in ways that men are not.
Some of the key decision makers in the ultra- extremely well planned and orchestrated take down of Osama Bin Laden were women. One in particular was Michelle Flournoy who was a top level researcher, mission plotter, black widow, and overall wizard who had Obamas ear. The Islamists are plainly stupid for their attitude toward women.
I like this post. ;D
honestly though, it's really time to end the gender wars and evolve. Skills based on what hangs, (or doesn't hang,) between your legs is ancient thinking, closed minded and necessary.
it's really sad this country is like....probably never going to.
Quote from: Icarus on July 16, 2012, 02:24:11 AM
Not much to praise, but at least a small start..........The Saudis will have two female athletes at the Olympic games. This has never happened before. One of the women will compete in Judo, the other in track. I do not know whether they will compete while shrouded in their head scarves. The judo contestant will be required to wear a judo gi (standard unifiorm) that is part of the standing rules of shiai. (shiai is the contest of one opponent against the other) The head scarf would probably be allowed but it may be dislaced accidentally during the contest
.
The Saudis, along with the rest of the strict Islamists who subjugate females, are clearly crapping in their mess kits. They are leaving one of their most valuable resources to be cloistered, suppressed, wasted.
Our CIA has many women operatives who are, on balance, more efficient than men. (male chauvinist pigs like me take no pleasure in this reality) In the words of a high ranking male CIA project leader; women do not waste time telling war stories, or go outside the building to smoke cigarettes, they are shrewd and insightful in ways that men are not.
Some of the key decision makers in the ultra- extremely well planned and orchestrated take down of Osama Bin Laden were women. One in particular was Michelle Flournoy who was a top level researcher, mission plotter, black widow, and overall wizard who had Obamas ear. The Islamists are plainly stupid for their attitude toward women.
The current Saudi monarchy is certainly taking some baby steps towards women's rights, but they're baby steps for a reason. Push too hard and the conservatives push back, and possibly with a vengeance. They still can't drive, for example. Still, it is a positive sign.
It is very difficult to interpret this article as a Westerner, and for this reason reason I must shed my Western skin and look to my (Lebanese) Arabic heritage and experience. Also, I have many Saudi students, both men and women, in my classes and understand a little of this unique culture.
In general, I adore my Saudi students. A few are lazy or arrogant, but most are respectful, sincere, hard-working and a pleasure to teach. They love to laugh and have a delightful sense of humor. In fact, we have a teacher from the Bible Belt who does not understand Saudi culture well... So, with a straight face, one of her Saudi students once approached her and asked for advice on an American gift he could bring back for his camel. She believed him and actually started to give advice until a few classmates started to snicker. When she realized she had been had, she burst out laughing and commended the student.
The first thing you need to understand is that strict Islamic law is mainly for public places. People can generally do what they wish in their own homes. Traditionally, even very religious women do not wear head coverings at home with relatives and close friends. Some modern women do not wear them at all at home even if there are males they do not know well visiting. Some sects do cover the face completely, revealing only the eyes; however, for most religious Saudi women, only the hair is covered. The forehead, nose, eyes, cheeks, mouth and chin are not. In fact, Saudi women often look like nuns, and I have amazed more than one Saudi student by showing pictures of nuns. That breaks another stereotype.
It is worth noting that head coverings and even veils are not Muslim inventions. Ancient Greek (Pagan) women, Jewish women, and Christian women wore them in the Middle East and Greece long before the dawning of Islam. It is a cultural issue, not a religious one, and was originally a way to protect women from predators--although there has always been a religious element attached in certain times and places.
Middle and upper class Saudi women tend to be very, very pampered and are not as restricted as one may think. True, they cannot drive, but their chauffeurs take them anywhere they want to go at any time. There are gyms and soccer teams for Saudi women, for example. I in no way say that I feel women lead an ideal life there, but I do say that it is not what many Westerners think.
While the way some men treat them is sexist and not something I approve of, I have been told by many Saudi students, both married ones and ones who will eventually marry, that women are like queens one should sacrifice oneself to serve. (The language they use reminds me of Medieval courtly love in Europe.) In my classes I have seen many newly married husbands and wives from Saudi Arabia who are deeply in love; it is obvious in their body language and glances at one another.
Sadly, there is physical and sexual abuse in Saudi Arabia (as there is everywhere), and not every women finds such a happy marriage. One may also argue that by being in my university classroom in the U.S., my students come from the upper levels of Saudi society. It is also true that a woman there has a hard time finding justice. Some believe that if a woman is raped she should be put to death since she "allowed" the rape to happen and cannot marry as a virgin and thus fulfill family honor. Many others, particularly the well educated, think such a belief barbaric. Some Saudi fathers are animals; others deeply love and respect their daughters. But isn't that true of all countries?
Expressing dissent is dangerous, which is why this article is heroic. The dissent is very cautious, with assurance of respect for Islam and traditional values. The princess could be a devout believer or an atheist; there is no way to tell since atheists would not express themselves openly the way we do here. (But I can tell you that Saudi atheists do exist.)
The real danger to freethinkers is Saudi Arabia's plainclothes morality police, and my students have told me stories of when they were arrested (walking with a woman who was not a relative -- you have to carry identity papers at all times) and nearly arrested (a male wearing a sleeveless shirt at a mall because it was very hot outside). Another male in my class, a student with a pony tail, says he would be arrested in his county if he had it there; it is considered women's hair. Before he goes back, he has to get a haircut.
These laws only apply to locals. In the words of the young Saudi in the sleeveless shirt, the morality police then spotted another man with a sleeveless shirt, but all he had to do was say he was Lebanese for them to wish him a nice day. The morality police are only for Saudis, not Arabs from other countries and non-Arabs.
Many Saudis disagree with the way the Saudi government enforces zealous religious laws and break them in secret--or when they are on vacation or studying abroad. To the Saudis, Bahrain is like Spring Break Florida, Spring Break Cancun, and year-round Las Vegas rolled into one. If they wish, they can get drunk there, they can have premarital sex (and for some not necessarily heterosexual sex) without having to be hyper-careful that no one else knows about it, and they can do many things that they are not supposed to do before putting back on the mantle of religious conformity and re-entering their country.
There are also zones in Saudi Arabia where anything goes for locals and foreigners. One students told me about a section of Jeddah, her city, where women can drive and dress as they wish--but only in that part of the city.
Imagine if the ultra-religious ran the national and local government in your country and imposed their laws on you. That is what Saudi Arabia is like. But don't condemn the people because of their government or traditional culture. Many Saudis, religious or secular, are delightful people and nothing like the fanatic stereotype. If you ever have the chance to meet Saudi people or make Saudi friends, you will be very pleasantly surprised.
Excellent post, TheWalkingContradiction; thank you!
I appreciate your post TWC. I can't say that I've known many Saudi's personally, though I'd like to think that I'd try to keep from jumping to any conclusions if/when I meet them. My general attitude is to treat the people I meet with respect unless they give me a reason not to. :)
As for the "treated like queens" comment, I believe you, but I'm a believer of "a gilded cage is still a cage." I find the notion of chivalry or courtly love pretty distasteful, actually. I don't even like it when men go out of their way to hold the door open for me (if it's in an obvious "ladies first" kinda way).
So, I can see how there'd be a pretty wide divide in worldviews there.
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 17, 2012, 03:35:00 AM
I appreciate your post TWC. I can't say that I've known many Saudi's personally, though I'd like to think that I'd try to keep from jumping to any conclusions if/when I meet them. My general attitude is to treat the people I meet with respect unless they give me a reason not to. :)
As for the "treated like queens" comment, I believe you, but I'm a believer of "a gilded cage is still a cage." I find the notion of chivalry or courtly love pretty distasteful, actually. I don't even like it when men go out of their way to hold the door open for me (if it's in an obvious "ladies first" kinda way).
So, I can see how there'd be a pretty wide divide in worldviews there.
Haha, oh DJ. You reminded me that when men hold the door open for my friend, she goes through the other side (double door) herself.
I dislike the most when i am walking to elevator and men waits for me to get on, though i am further than him. I just give him a dirty look or tell him "well, please go. i'm waiting to get on."
chivarly is bullshit. A thinly veiled form of putting a woman as second class.
I hold doors because I feel it's the polite thing to do.
DJ, SD... if we ever happen upon the same door at the same time, expect me to hold it open for you. That's how my mom, dad, coaches, and many other respectable men that have shaped who I am have taught/displayed to me. It's nothing personal.
Frankly, reading in to it that holding a door for you is a way of reminding you you are second class or something is quite a reach, IMO. Like I said, I do it because I think it's polite. I hold the door for my wife every time to the point that she will catch herself waiting at the door for me.
I got glared at once while in college for darting ahead to hold a door for another student. She glared and muttered something about "I don't need a man to hold my doors" or something. I told her to FO after that.
I hold a door open for somebody irrespective of their gender. Manners cost nothing.
Quote from: hismikeness on July 17, 2012, 10:42:33 AM
DJ, SD... if we ever happen upon the same door at the same time, expect me to hold it open for you. That's how my mom, dad, coaches, and many other respectable men that have shaped who I am have taught/displayed to me. It's nothing personal.
Frankly, reading in to it that holding a door for you is a way of reminding you you are second class or something is quite a reach, IMO. Like I said, I do it because I think it's polite. I hold the door for my wife every time to the point that she will catch herself waiting at the door for me.
I got glared at once while in college for darting ahead to hold a door for another student. She glared and muttered something about "I don't need a man to hold my doors" or something. I told her to FO after that.
I'm never rude about it, and I don't think it makes me a "second class citizen", I just don't like it when it's obviously a gendered thing (generally being polite is fine, I usually go out of my way to hold the door for people, too.) But some men make a big show of "ladies first" and I just don't enjoy it very much. I got on an elevator a few weeks ago and a man did this - he was obviously ahead of me, but he jumped back behind me and another woman and said "ladies first!" with a big cheesy grin and then he "guided" us on the elevator by putting his hands near the small of our backs. I'm sure he thought he was being nice, but I can't help it, it bothered me. I'm not "special" just because of my sex. I don't need to get on an elevator first (I certainly don't need to be physically guided onto it).
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 17, 2012, 12:11:27 PM
Quote from: hismikeness on July 17, 2012, 10:42:33 AM
DJ, SD... if we ever happen upon the same door at the same time, expect me to hold it open for you. That's how my mom, dad, coaches, and many other respectable men that have shaped who I am have taught/displayed to me. It's nothing personal.
Frankly, reading in to it that holding a door for you is a way of reminding you you are second class or something is quite a reach, IMO. Like I said, I do it because I think it's polite. I hold the door for my wife every time to the point that she will catch herself waiting at the door for me.
I got glared at once while in college for darting ahead to hold a door for another student. She glared and muttered something about "I don't need a man to hold my doors" or something. I told her to FO after that.
I'm never rude about it, and I don't think it makes me a "second class citizen", I just don't like it when it's obviously a gendered thing (generally being polite is fine, I usually go out of my way to hold the door for people, too.) But some men make a big show of "ladies first" and I just don't enjoy it very much. I got on an elevator a few weeks ago and a man did this - he was obviously ahead of me, but he jumped back behind me and another woman and said "ladies first!" with a big cheesy grin and then he "guided" us on the elevator by putting his hands near the small of our backs. I'm sure he thought he was being nice, but I can't help it, it bothered me. I'm not "special" just because of my sex. I don't need to get on an elevator first (I certainly don't need to be physically guided onto it).
Then don't expect any special treatment when you're pregnant, on your period or too weak to open a jar, wire a plug, or all the other things at which men are instinctively better.
There is a reason women are treated differently - it's because they're different. Gotta take the rough with the smooth I'm afraid girls!
Quote from: hismikeness on July 17, 2012, 10:42:33 AM
I hold doors because I feel it's the polite thing to do.
DJ, SD... if we ever happen upon the same door at the same time, expect me to hold it open for you. That's how my mom, dad, coaches, and many other respectable men that have shaped who I am have taught/displayed to me. It's nothing personal.
Frankly, reading in to it that holding a door for you is a way of reminding you you are second class or something is quite a reach, IMO. Like I said, I do it because I think it's polite. I hold the door for my wife every time to the point that she will catch herself waiting at the door for me.
I got glared at once while in college for darting ahead to hold a door for another student. She glared and muttered something about "I don't need a man to hold my doors" or something. I told her to FO after that.
Nothing personal to you as well, Mikeness.
I suppose some women feel almost offended at a man holding the door open. I know it bothers me. I apologize ^^; but i doubt my feelings will change.
There is a difference though of someone holding the door open (as Tank said) without seeing gender. But there are a lot of men who only hold door open for women, or have that look/air about them when they are waiting for you. I won't rush either, so i'll go through another door. I really feel almost degraded when men hold it open for me, expecting me to flutter in like some princess. ::)
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 12:39:27 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 17, 2012, 12:11:27 PM
Quote from: hismikeness on July 17, 2012, 10:42:33 AM
DJ, SD... if we ever happen upon the same door at the same time, expect me to hold it open for you. That's how my mom, dad, coaches, and many other respectable men that have shaped who I am have taught/displayed to me. It's nothing personal.
Frankly, reading in to it that holding a door for you is a way of reminding you you are second class or something is quite a reach, IMO. Like I said, I do it because I think it's polite. I hold the door for my wife every time to the point that she will catch herself waiting at the door for me.
I got glared at once while in college for darting ahead to hold a door for another student. She glared and muttered something about "I don't need a man to hold my doors" or something. I told her to FO after that.
I'm never rude about it, and I don't think it makes me a "second class citizen", I just don't like it when it's obviously a gendered thing (generally being polite is fine, I usually go out of my way to hold the door for people, too.) But some men make a big show of "ladies first" and I just don't enjoy it very much. I got on an elevator a few weeks ago and a man did this - he was obviously ahead of me, but he jumped back behind me and another woman and said "ladies first!" with a big cheesy grin and then he "guided" us on the elevator by putting his hands near the small of our backs. I'm sure he thought he was being nice, but I can't help it, it bothered me. I'm not "special" just because of my sex. I don't need to get on an elevator first (I certainly don't need to be physically guided onto it).
Then don't expect any special treatment when you're pregnant, on your period or too weak to open a jar, wire a plug, or all the other things at which men are instinctively better.
There is a reason women are treated differently - it's because they're different. Gotta take the rough with the smooth I'm afraid girls!
Too weak to open a jar or wire a plug? Are you really being serious? I hope not. :-\
This whole 'my skills are different based on my gender' bullshit is over. At least it needs to be. People should not be expected to know how to or not how to do things because of their reproductive organs.
(DJ: I would of so cursed that guy out. that would of pissed me off. Also, there's like really no need for some stranger to try to act 'suave' by guiding you. Wow. ::) )
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 12:39:27 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 17, 2012, 12:11:27 PM
Quote from: hismikeness on July 17, 2012, 10:42:33 AM
DJ, SD... if we ever happen upon the same door at the same time, expect me to hold it open for you. That's how my mom, dad, coaches, and many other respectable men that have shaped who I am have taught/displayed to me. It's nothing personal.
Frankly, reading in to it that holding a door for you is a way of reminding you you are second class or something is quite a reach, IMO. Like I said, I do it because I think it's polite. I hold the door for my wife every time to the point that she will catch herself waiting at the door for me.
I got glared at once while in college for darting ahead to hold a door for another student. She glared and muttered something about "I don't need a man to hold my doors" or something. I told her to FO after that.
I'm never rude about it, and I don't think it makes me a "second class citizen", I just don't like it when it's obviously a gendered thing (generally being polite is fine, I usually go out of my way to hold the door for people, too.) But some men make a big show of "ladies first" and I just don't enjoy it very much. I got on an elevator a few weeks ago and a man did this - he was obviously ahead of me, but he jumped back behind me and another woman and said "ladies first!" with a big cheesy grin and then he "guided" us on the elevator by putting his hands near the small of our backs. I'm sure he thought he was being nice, but I can't help it, it bothered me. I'm not "special" just because of my sex. I don't need to get on an elevator first (I certainly don't need to be physically guided onto it).
Then don't expect any special treatment when you're pregnant, on your period or too weak to open a jar, wire a plug, or all the other things at which men are instinctively better.
There is a reason women are treated differently - it's because they're different. Gotta take the rough with the smooth I'm afraid girls!
Puny, helpless and cackhanded as all women are without exception, I think they might still be able to just about open a door unaided. Once you'd shown them how to perform that intricate task first of course. I am curious as to how you know a woman is on her period in order to afford her special treatment. I suppose you have to ask and if she says no, then treat her as if she were a man.
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 17, 2012, 02:10:59 PM
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 12:39:27 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 17, 2012, 12:11:27 PM
Quote from: hismikeness on July 17, 2012, 10:42:33 AM
DJ, SD... if we ever happen upon the same door at the same time, expect me to hold it open for you. That's how my mom, dad, coaches, and many other respectable men that have shaped who I am have taught/displayed to me. It's nothing personal.
Frankly, reading in to it that holding a door for you is a way of reminding you you are second class or something is quite a reach, IMO. Like I said, I do it because I think it's polite. I hold the door for my wife every time to the point that she will catch herself waiting at the door for me.
I got glared at once while in college for darting ahead to hold a door for another student. She glared and muttered something about "I don't need a man to hold my doors" or something. I told her to FO after that.
I'm never rude about it, and I don't think it makes me a "second class citizen", I just don't like it when it's obviously a gendered thing (generally being polite is fine, I usually go out of my way to hold the door for people, too.) But some men make a big show of "ladies first" and I just don't enjoy it very much. I got on an elevator a few weeks ago and a man did this - he was obviously ahead of me, but he jumped back behind me and another woman and said "ladies first!" with a big cheesy grin and then he "guided" us on the elevator by putting his hands near the small of our backs. I'm sure he thought he was being nice, but I can't help it, it bothered me. I'm not "special" just because of my sex. I don't need to get on an elevator first (I certainly don't need to be physically guided onto it).
Then don't expect any special treatment when you're pregnant, on your period or too weak to open a jar, wire a plug, or all the other things at which men are instinctively better.
There is a reason women are treated differently - it's because they're different. Gotta take the rough with the smooth I'm afraid girls!
Too weak to open a jar or wire a plug? Are you really being serious? I hope not. :-\
This whole 'my skills are different based on my gender' bullshit is over. At least it needs to be. People should not be expected to know how to or not how to do things because of their reproductive organs.
(DJ: I would of so cursed that guy out. that would of pissed me off. Also, there's like really no need for some stranger to try to act 'suave' by guiding you. Wow. ::) )
SD, men and women ARE different. That is a fact. Men and womens brains are wired differently and have accordingly differing abilities. They are also phisically less strong. Those are also facts.
The premise of my post is to highlight the conflict which occurs when women argue for equal rights yet still require special allowances because of their womanly dispositions.
I totally respect a womans right to be treated equally and encourage it. But that requires a woman to accept that there are some things that a man is predisposed to doing better (and the converse is also true). Equality means having to compete under the same rules and not expect special treatment to account for gender-specific needs or shortfalls.
The day women stop having to ask their husband to wire the plug, get shit down from the loft, open a jar, carry the shopping, fix the car (etc...) is the day I stop making the EXTRA effort to hold a door for them just in case I am seen as misogynistic for letting it slam in their face.
Why do they ask hubby to do these things? Because they're easier for men to do than for women. I don't blame women for that, I just want women to understand that the inequality is not created by men.
^ This. Mrs Git and I are both quite happy with me doing the kind of jobs that Siz describes, while she does most of the cooking and gardening. Of course we both help each other with all sorts of stuff.
She's quite capable of checking the car's tyres if she has to, but she'd rather I did it. I can cook some simple stuff if I have to, but I don't enjoy it. Why should I cook when she's a real genius at cooking, and loves doing it? Naturally I help by peeling spuds and simple stuff like that, just as she'll help me out with repair jobs, when necessary.
I'm not as certain as Siz that these attributes are inherent in all men and women, but they are in us, and in many other couples I know.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 03:12:16 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 17, 2012, 02:10:59 PM
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 12:39:27 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 17, 2012, 12:11:27 PM
Quote from: hismikeness on July 17, 2012, 10:42:33 AM
DJ, SD... if we ever happen upon the same door at the same time, expect me to hold it open for you. That's how my mom, dad, coaches, and many other respectable men that have shaped who I am have taught/displayed to me. It's nothing personal.
Frankly, reading in to it that holding a door for you is a way of reminding you you are second class or something is quite a reach, IMO. Like I said, I do it because I think it's polite. I hold the door for my wife every time to the point that she will catch herself waiting at the door for me.
I got glared at once while in college for darting ahead to hold a door for another student. She glared and muttered something about "I don't need a man to hold my doors" or something. I told her to FO after that.
I'm never rude about it, and I don't think it makes me a "second class citizen", I just don't like it when it's obviously a gendered thing (generally being polite is fine, I usually go out of my way to hold the door for people, too.) But some men make a big show of "ladies first" and I just don't enjoy it very much. I got on an elevator a few weeks ago and a man did this - he was obviously ahead of me, but he jumped back behind me and another woman and said "ladies first!" with a big cheesy grin and then he "guided" us on the elevator by putting his hands near the small of our backs. I'm sure he thought he was being nice, but I can't help it, it bothered me. I'm not "special" just because of my sex. I don't need to get on an elevator first (I certainly don't need to be physically guided onto it).
Then don't expect any special treatment when you're pregnant, on your period or too weak to open a jar, wire a plug, or all the other things at which men are instinctively better.
There is a reason women are treated differently - it's because they're different. Gotta take the rough with the smooth I'm afraid girls!
Too weak to open a jar or wire a plug? Are you really being serious? I hope not. :-\
This whole 'my skills are different based on my gender' bullshit is over. At least it needs to be. People should not be expected to know how to or not how to do things because of their reproductive organs.
(DJ: I would of so cursed that guy out. that would of pissed me off. Also, there's like really no need for some stranger to try to act 'suave' by guiding you. Wow. ::) )
SD, men and women ARE different. That is a fact. Men and womens brains are wired differently and have accordingly differing abilities. They are also phisically less strong. Those are also facts.
The premise of my post is to highlight the conflict which occurs when women argue for equal rights yet still require special allowances because of their womanly dispositions.
I totally respect a womans right to be treated equally and encourage it. But that requires a woman to accept that there are some things that a man is predisposed to doing better (and the converse is also true). Equality means having to compete under the same rules and not expect special treatment to account for gender-specific needs or shortfalls.
The day women stop having to ask their husband to wire the plug, get shit down from the loft, open a jar, carry the shopping, fix the car (etc...) is the day I stop making the EXTRA effort to hold a door for them just in case I am seen as misogynistic for letting it slam in their face.
Why do they ask hubby to do these things? Because they're easier for men to do than for women. I don't blame women for that, I just want women to understand that the inequality is not created by me
There does seem to be wide scientific acceptance that the typical female brain is wired differently from the typical male brain, although given the plasticity of the brain, it is possible for a female brain to develop strengths in areas that are typically associated with male brains, and vice versa, so nurture can cancel out nature in many cases. Over and above this, a significant number of men have actually predominantly female brains- and vice versa. We've all encountered this phenomenon in everyday life, and it is separate from sexuality. So, to generalise and say that all men are more proficient than all women in certain aspects of life is manifestly wrong. These kind of generalisations are destructive because they unthinkingly pigeonhole people and make rigid judgements about individuals, which are not based on evidence and which serve to defend discriminatory and biased behaviours.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 03:12:16 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 17, 2012, 02:10:59 PM
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 12:39:27 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 17, 2012, 12:11:27 PM
Quote from: hismikeness on July 17, 2012, 10:42:33 AM
DJ, SD... if we ever happen upon the same door at the same time, expect me to hold it open for you. That's how my mom, dad, coaches, and many other respectable men that have shaped who I am have taught/displayed to me. It's nothing personal.
Frankly, reading in to it that holding a door for you is a way of reminding you you are second class or something is quite a reach, IMO. Like I said, I do it because I think it's polite. I hold the door for my wife every time to the point that she will catch herself waiting at the door for me.
I got glared at once while in college for darting ahead to hold a door for another student. She glared and muttered something about "I don't need a man to hold my doors" or something. I told her to FO after that.
I'm never rude about it, and I don't think it makes me a "second class citizen", I just don't like it when it's obviously a gendered thing (generally being polite is fine, I usually go out of my way to hold the door for people, too.) But some men make a big show of "ladies first" and I just don't enjoy it very much. I got on an elevator a few weeks ago and a man did this - he was obviously ahead of me, but he jumped back behind me and another woman and said "ladies first!" with a big cheesy grin and then he "guided" us on the elevator by putting his hands near the small of our backs. I'm sure he thought he was being nice, but I can't help it, it bothered me. I'm not "special" just because of my sex. I don't need to get on an elevator first (I certainly don't need to be physically guided onto it).
Then don't expect any special treatment when you're pregnant, on your period or too weak to open a jar, wire a plug, or all the other things at which men are instinctively better.
There is a reason women are treated differently - it's because they're different. Gotta take the rough with the smooth I'm afraid girls!
Too weak to open a jar or wire a plug? Are you really being serious? I hope not. :-\
This whole 'my skills are different based on my gender' bullshit is over. At least it needs to be. People should not be expected to know how to or not how to do things because of their reproductive organs.
(DJ: I would of so cursed that guy out. that would of pissed me off. Also, there's like really no need for some stranger to try to act 'suave' by guiding you. Wow. ::) )
SD, men and women ARE different. That is a fact. Men and womens brains are wired differently and have accordingly differing abilities. They are also phisically less strong. Those are also facts.
The premise of my post is to highlight the conflict which occurs when women argue for equal rights yet still require special allowances because of their womanly dispositions.
I totally respect a womans right to be treated equally and encourage it. But that requires a woman to accept that there are some things that a man is predisposed to doing better (and the converse is also true). Equality means having to compete under the same rules and not expect special treatment to account for gender-specific needs or shortfalls.
The day women stop having to ask their husband to wire the plug, get shit down from the loft, open a jar, carry the shopping, fix the car (etc...) is the day I stop making the EXTRA effort to hold a door for them just in case I am seen as misogynistic for letting it slam in their face.
Why do they ask hubby to do these things? Because they're easier for men to do than for women. I don't blame women for that, I just want women to understand that the inequality is not created by men.
scratch that--
Do you honestly think your fucking generalising helps at all?
I know plently of women who don't need a 'man' to open a jar for them. What the fuck kind of bullshit is that?
There is no such thing as 'all women need this' and 'all men need to do this for women' thing. That way of thinking just prevents any kind of gender bias from not existing. I certainly don't need any man for opening jars and holding my bags. I'm sorry, but your way of thinking (if you are serious) is infuriating, because it's such a terrible bias.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 12:39:27 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 17, 2012, 12:11:27 PM
Quote from: hismikeness on July 17, 2012, 10:42:33 AM
DJ, SD... if we ever happen upon the same door at the same time, expect me to hold it open for you. That's how my mom, dad, coaches, and many other respectable men that have shaped who I am have taught/displayed to me. It's nothing personal.
Frankly, reading in to it that holding a door for you is a way of reminding you you are second class or something is quite a reach, IMO. Like I said, I do it because I think it's polite. I hold the door for my wife every time to the point that she will catch herself waiting at the door for me.
I got glared at once while in college for darting ahead to hold a door for another student. She glared and muttered something about "I don't need a man to hold my doors" or something. I told her to FO after that.
I'm never rude about it, and I don't think it makes me a "second class citizen", I just don't like it when it's obviously a gendered thing (generally being polite is fine, I usually go out of my way to hold the door for people, too.) But some men make a big show of "ladies first" and I just don't enjoy it very much. I got on an elevator a few weeks ago and a man did this - he was obviously ahead of me, but he jumped back behind me and another woman and said "ladies first!" with a big cheesy grin and then he "guided" us on the elevator by putting his hands near the small of our backs. I'm sure he thought he was being nice, but I can't help it, it bothered me. I'm not "special" just because of my sex. I don't need to get on an elevator first (I certainly don't need to be physically guided onto it).
Then don't expect any special treatment when you're pregnant, on your period or too weak to open a jar, wire a plug, or all the other things at which men are instinctively better.
There is a reason women are treated differently - it's because they're different. Gotta take the rough with the smooth I'm afraid girls!
Who designed the jam jar that a woman couldn't open? Probably a man. That's a design issue. Not a user issue. I'm sure that there are some men that can't open jam jars, oh yes, old ones that don't have sufficient strength any more.
There are also these things
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegoodstore.com.au%2FUploads%2FImages%2Fjarkey-frost.jpg&hash=abb572fe73b52013799f71b057fc7d11b499eb04)
That break the vacuum on a jar thus rendering it much easier to open.
When I was a kid my dad was an electrical salesman. He taught me how to wire plugs. I don't know how to wire plugs because I was born with a penis I can wire a plug because somebody taught my to.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 03:12:16 PM
Quote from: Sweetdeath on July 17, 2012, 02:10:59 PM
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 12:39:27 PM
Quote from: DeterminedJuliet on July 17, 2012, 12:11:27 PM
Quote from: hismikeness on July 17, 2012, 10:42:33 AM
DJ, SD... if we ever happen upon the same door at the same time, expect me to hold it open for you. That's how my mom, dad, coaches, and many other respectable men that have shaped who I am have taught/displayed to me. It's nothing personal.
Frankly, reading in to it that holding a door for you is a way of reminding you you are second class or something is quite a reach, IMO. Like I said, I do it because I think it's polite. I hold the door for my wife every time to the point that she will catch herself waiting at the door for me.
I got glared at once while in college for darting ahead to hold a door for another student. She glared and muttered something about "I don't need a man to hold my doors" or something. I told her to FO after that.
I'm never rude about it, and I don't think it makes me a "second class citizen", I just don't like it when it's obviously a gendered thing (generally being polite is fine, I usually go out of my way to hold the door for people, too.) But some men make a big show of "ladies first" and I just don't enjoy it very much. I got on an elevator a few weeks ago and a man did this - he was obviously ahead of me, but he jumped back behind me and another woman and said "ladies first!" with a big cheesy grin and then he "guided" us on the elevator by putting his hands near the small of our backs. I'm sure he thought he was being nice, but I can't help it, it bothered me. I'm not "special" just because of my sex. I don't need to get on an elevator first (I certainly don't need to be physically guided onto it).
Then don't expect any special treatment when you're pregnant, on your period or too weak to open a jar, wire a plug, or all the other things at which men are instinctively better.
There is a reason women are treated differently - it's because they're different. Gotta take the rough with the smooth I'm afraid girls!
Too weak to open a jar or wire a plug? Are you really being serious? I hope not. :-\
This whole 'my skills are different based on my gender' bullshit is over. At least it needs to be. People should not be expected to know how to or not how to do things because of their reproductive organs.
(DJ: I would of so cursed that guy out. that would of pissed me off. Also, there's like really no need for some stranger to try to act 'suave' by guiding you. Wow. ::) )
SD, men and women ARE different. That is a fact. Men and womens brains are wired differently and have accordingly differing abilities. They are also phisically less strong. Those are also facts.
They may be facts but they are not the whole story. Because there is such wide variation in the populations of men and women there will be people all over the place in terms of capabilities. The issue here is that it's also a common misconception that in large variable populations that the average is meaningful predictive measure of central tendency in any one individual within the population. It isn't, one can't simply say everybody in population A is taller than everybody in population B simply because the average height of population A is greater than the average height in population B. This is the fallacy of 'isms, sexism, racism etc. The statistics of the population give no indication of the values for any individual in that population.
Which of the following two is the stronger?
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F_uSwq105msfw%2FTOCOEcFNa7I%2FAAAAAAAAAfM%2FbUjNlXn_Lu8%2Fs400%2Ffemale-bodybuilder.s600x600.jpg&hash=7eb519f7ac4484e8defc0f7356100189e4be8c54)
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.sodahead.com%2Fpolls%2F001760061%2F399984932_skinny_guy_answer_1_xlarge.jpeg&hash=29436caf25db0871bf05146125009c17a30f6ef2)
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 03:12:16 PM
The premise of my post is to highlight the conflict which occurs when women argue for equal rights yet still require special allowances because of their womanly dispositions.
Personally I've never met a woman who asked for both equality AND special privilages.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 03:12:16 PM
I totally respect a womans right to be treated equally and encourage it. But that requires a woman to accept that there are some things that a man is predisposed to doing better (and the converse is also true).
No this is the fallacy of the average. At the level of the individual population averages are meaningless and can be very misleading.
You're using statistics in the way a drunk uses a lamp post; for support rather than illumination.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 03:12:16 PM
Equality means having to compete under the same rules and not expect special treatment to account for gender-specific needs or shortfalls.
Agreed. Provided the rules are fair and equatable in the first place. And as men have made the rules for millennia how do we know they are fair and equatable?
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 03:12:16 PM
The day women stop having to ask their husband to wire the plug, get shit down from the loft, open a jar, carry the shopping, fix the car (etc...) is the day I stop making the EXTRA effort to hold a door for them just in case I am seen as misogynistic for letting it slam in their face.
I think we need to have general education in our schools for life skills, shopping, car maintenance, sowing, plug changing, balancing a bank account, cooking, tool use etc etc. That's were the skills issue can be countered from day one.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 03:12:16 PM
Why do they ask hubby to do these things? Because they're easier for men to do than for women. I don't blame women for that, I just want women to understand that the inequality is not created by men.
It's only easier for men to do these because they are expected to know these things and are thus pressured by society into being taught how to do them. All my kids can cook, sow, change a light bold, check the tyre pressures on their car because I taught them to, not because they have a penis or a vagina. ;D
Quote from: En_Route on July 17, 2012, 03:43:09 PM
There does seem to be wide scientific acceptance that the typical female brain is wired differently from the typical male brain, although given the plasticity of the brain, it is possible for a female brain to develop strengths in areas that are typically associated with male brains, and vice versa, so nurture can cancel out nature in many cases. Over and above this, a significant number of men have actually predominantly female brains- and vice versa. We've all encountered this phenomenon in everyday life, and it is separate from sexuality. So, to generalise and say that all men are more proficient than all women in certain aspects of life is manifestly wrong. These kind of generalisations are destructive because they unthinkingly pigeonhole people and make rigid judgements about individuals, which are not based on evidence and which serve to defend discriminatory and biased behaviours.
Are you suggesting that we try to rewire womens brains to be more like mens? Cos that'd be stupid, right?!
If we are to talk about a social phenomenon (like sexism) then it is prudent to generalise. Of course there are exceptions, but we could not formulate ANY kind of workable social system if we are forced to account for every exception. If you will not allow us to debate a social issue based on reasonable generalisations then we're not going to get very far on any subject. I argue that my generalisations ARE reasonable because the facts of gender difference are well established and undisputed.
I can not apologise for acting towards a woman in a way that I consider it appropriate to act towards women. Yes, I am guilty of treating every female stranger I meet with equal respect. And I
am prejudiced when I relate to women, just like I am prejudiced when I relate to children, or dogs, or spiders because they have discrete mental motivations.
Let's try to put sexism into context here. If I am to treat women equally then I would request reciprocal consideration and not be made predominantly responsible for certain physical chores around the house. Is that not fair? (and for the record I undertake many traditionally wifely duties around the house with pride).
It's sad that one would consider an act of respectful chivalry an expression of dominance or superiority. Especially as we men suffer the social dilemma of not knowing whether we're dealing with a feminist or traditionalist when we approach the lift doors.
You may choose to call it sexist, I'd call it a celebration of our gender differences.
I don't mind at all when a man opens a door from me. It's an act of politeness, and for many older gentlemen, it's how they were taught to show respect to a woman. "Ladies first", I take as a compliment with a nod and a smile. The only reason to blow off the gesture would be to say, "Screw you, old man - we don't do things that way anymore", which seems a bit rude when the intent was only a good one. There are plenty of rude people that aggravate me, such as the gent that got in my mom's face and gruffly told her to stand aside because he was trying to walk through (whatever happened to "excuse me"?). I told him he was an asshole. So, I make it a policy to reward politeness when I see it, and offer it generously myself. There are many genuine and significant issues of sexism to get in a tizzy about, and for me, that's not one of them.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 06:00:52 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 17, 2012, 03:43:09 PM
There does seem to be wide scientific acceptance that the typical female brain is wired differently from the typical male brain, although given the plasticity of the brain, it is possible for a female brain to develop strengths in areas that are typically associated with male brains, and vice versa, so nurture can cancel out nature in many cases. Over and above this, a significant number of men have actually predominantly female brains- and vice versa. We've all encountered this phenomenon in everyday life, and it is separate from sexuality. So, to generalise and say that all men are more proficient than all women in certain aspects of life is manifestly wrong. These kind of generalisations are destructive because they unthinkingly pigeonhole people and make rigid judgements about individuals, which are not based on evidence and which serve to defend discriminatory and biased behaviours.
Are you suggesting that we try to rewire womens brains to be more like mens? Cos that'd be stupid, right?!
If we are to talk about a social phenomenon (like sexism) then it is prudent to generalise. Of course there are exceptions, but we could not formulate ANY kind of workable social system if we are forced to account for every exception. If you will not allow us to debate a social issue based on reasonable generalisations then we're not going to get very far on any subject. I argue that my generalisations ARE reasonable because the facts of gender difference are well established and undisputed.
I can not apologise for acting towards a woman in a way that I consider it appropriate to act towards women. Yes, I am guilty of treating every female stranger I meet with equal respect. And I am prejudiced when I relate to women, just like I am prejudiced when I relate to children, or dogs, or spiders because they have discrete mental motivations.
Let's try to put sexism into context here. If I am to treat women equally then I would request reciprocal consideration and not be made predominantly responsible for certain physical chores around the house. Is that not fair? (and for the record I undertake many traditionally wifely duties around the house with pride).
It's sad that one would consider an act of respectful chivalry an expression of dominance or superiority. Especially as we men suffer the social dilemma of not knowing whether we're dealing with a feminist or traditionalist when we approach the lift doors.
You may choose to call it sexist, I'd call it a celebration of our gender differences.
As I said the brain is plastic, so men or women can rewire their brains to develop aptitudes that do not come as naturally.
Your point about the necessity for making generalisations to operate a workable social system is an empty one. One can make valid generalisations- let us day that women tend to be more empathetic than men. That doesn't, mandate conducting society on the basis that every woman is more empathetic than every man. The danger is not in the generalisation but in acting as if the generalisation must always hold true at the individual level.
Once you accept that women are potentially capable of doing anything as well or better than men then it ceases to be relevant whether this is true for a minority or majority of women. It implies that in a society which wishes to treat individuals equally, all individuals must have equal opportunitirs. As I have also said, many men have predominantly female brains and vice versa, so the exceptions are more numerous than you suggest. I notice that you have only cited those areas where you believe women to be constitutionally inferior to men- in terms of physical strength, ability to rewire plugs etc and as requiring special care and attention when pregnant or menstruating and that you draw a comparison between their mindset and that of dogs and spiders. The uncharitable might suspect that beneath the ostentatious display of chivalry lurks rather a ugly misogyny.
Here's a handy trick. Ladies, if your weak little lady hands are having trouble opening a Jar of Something, thunk said Jar of Something on the counter. You want to turn it sideways so that you are holding on to bottom part of the jar, keeping it perpendicular* to the counter, and hit the lid part on the counter. Should help disturb the vaccuum and make it easier to open. For good measure, you might also want to thunk the Jar of Something over the head of whichever helpful man is hovering nearby, ready to pluck it from your delicate lady fingers and open it with a properly hairy and manly flourish.
*In case your sweet little lady brain struggles delicately with geometry, because Ugh, Math? I'd rather think about kitties and shoes!, perpendicular looks like a T. As opposed to horizontal which looks like an = sign. I know, I know, more math nonsense. You could also picture horizonal as being two adorable little shoes, lined up in one direction and ready to be worn or swooned over, or whatever. Wine and pedicures, am I right ladies?
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 06:00:52 PM
{snip}
If we are to talk about a social phenomenon (like sexism) then it is prudent to generalise.
I would disagree because generalisations are the roots of 'isms. I don't want anybody to expect I behave in a particular way based on generalisations. Suppose for example one day one of your kids stumbles across some kiddy porn by accident and has a look around out of curiosity, they won't tell you because they know they will get in trouble. Six months later the police knock on your door and charge you with accessing a kiddy porn site because you're the adult male in the house. How are you going to defend yourself? You can't you're going down because of a generalisation. This is why generalisation are the fallacy of the average.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 06:00:52 PM
Of course there are exceptions, but we could not formulate ANY kind of workable social system if we are forced to account for every exception.
Has anybody tried? Why bother with wheelchair access, hearing loops, studded paving stones, audible tones on pedestrian crossings? Our society to some extent fails almost everybody in primary and secondary education simply because we rely too much on generalisations.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 06:00:52 PM
If you will not allow us to debate a social issue based on reasonable generalisations then we're not going to get very far on any subject. I argue that my generalisations ARE reasonable because the facts of gender difference are well established and undisputed.
If these gender differences are 'well established and undisputed' it shouldn't be too difficult for you to cite the scientific research that support you position. I'm prepared to read the research but if you can't provide the research them I'm going to have to ignore your unfounded assertion that gender differences are 'well established and undisputed'.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 06:00:52 PM
I can not apologise for acting towards a woman in a way that I consider it appropriate to act towards women. Yes, I am guilty of treating every female stranger I meet with equal respect. And I am prejudiced when I relate to women, just like I am prejudiced when I relate to children, or dogs, or spiders because they have discrete mental motivations.
They have individual motivations. Children and dogs have very different personalities so I'm afraid your analogy just turned around and bit you in the arse :)
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 06:00:52 PM
Let's try to put sexism into context here. If I am to treat women equally then I would request reciprocal consideration and not be made predominantly responsible for certain physical chores around the house. Is that not fair? (and for the record I undertake many traditionally wifely duties around the house with pride).
Why would request reciprocal consideration? Are you totally inflexible? I doubt it. Is your behaviour totally reactive to those around you? I expect it isn't. Do you do bad things because people around you do bad things or good things because the people around you do good things? No I don't think you do (I don't either). I do things because I think they are right I don't do other things because I think they are bad. I don't require reciprocity to do what I know I should do.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 06:00:52 PM
It's sad that one would consider an act of respectful chivalry an expression of dominance or superiority. Especially as we men suffer the social dilemma of not knowing whether we're dealing with a feminist or traditionalist when we approach the lift doors.
Isn't it simply polite to hold a lift door for anybody, irrespective of race, age or gender? If a woman gets the hump because she perceives your politeness as sexism then that's her problem, not yours.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 06:00:52 PM
You may choose to call it sexist, I'd call it a celebration of our gender differences.
Sexism is a prejudice where an individual behaves towards another individual of the opposite gender based on stereotypes of that gender. I can't see any way that description does not apply to many of your statements. But I'm willing to be shown where I'm wrong.
I am sorry that my use of a quote (a Saudi man calling women queens that one must sacrifice oneself to serve) has caused such a breakdown in communication. Just a few comments.
1. I agree that the comment about queens was sexist at its base, but in context I was trying to show Saudi affection instead of hate for women. As Westerners, we cannot expect everyone to express himself or herself in terms of Western culture. I doubt the man who made the remark about queens has any context in which to understand why we Westerners (myself included) think his attitude is sexist. He probably (and rightfully so) thinks himself a step above people who mistreat women.
2. In my experience, non-Western women rally the strongest against Western feminism. I once taught an article I agree with that expressed how women do less well in math and science because girls are encouraged to play with dolls instead of taking things apart and putting them back together like boys. In addition, parents and teachers have different expectations for boys and girls, and while these expectations can be communicated consciously they are more often communicated unconsciously. Most of the Asian and Arab women in my class roared with laughter and strongly disagreed. Only a handful agreed.
3. When we talk about feminism, secularism, gay rights, liberalism, and so on in non-Western cultures, we run the risk of imposing our values on others. This differs little from colonialism, in which the superior European or American culture wants to teach the 'savages' Western (read that as "civilized") values. Mind you, there is certainly an important place for feminism and the rest on non-Western cultures, but the dialogue must be within the cultural norms of the culture in question instead of the cultural norms of the Western world. (This is an idea I can expand on if you wish.)
4. For what it is worth, I agree that many men (not all) have superior upper body strength. However, women's bodies are stronger than men's because evolution has equipped women with the ability to withstand the stress of pregnancy. For this reason, more women than men survive plagues, for example; Medieval Europe is a case in point. There are also more women than men in the world despite female infanticide, and some argue that females are more resilient than men even as infants facing illness. Many women live longer than men, although it is not clear if this is biological or sociological--the latter being a result of most women's not being corporate higher ups and the like, with all the ensuing unnatural stress, until recently. Further, most societies allow women to express emotions (even if they unfairly mock and stereotype them) while many men develop high blood pressure and heart problems from holding in so many emotions year after year. "Real" men do indeed cry (despite what people say); the proof is the existence of male tear ducts. However, men are not always permitted the necessity and dignity of crying to relieve emotional stress.
Oh sorry, my lady brain got in a tizzy and forgot to answer the other part I wanted to address. Must be all that blood pooling in my womb and away from my brain, amiright?
I don't mind it when anyone holds the door for me. I smile and say thank you. However, I would not appreciate a strange man putting his hand on the small of my back and guiding me onto an elevator like I'm an idiot that can't board an elevator without a big strong man to help me. Beyond condescending.
People often hold doors for people.
Quote from: Ali on July 17, 2012, 06:38:11 PM
Oh sorry, my lady brain got in a tizzy and forgot to answer the other part I wanted to address. Must be all that blood pooling in my womb and away from my brain, amiright?
I don't mind it when anyone holds the door for me. I smile and say thank you. However, I would not appreciate a strange man putting his hand on the small of my back and guiding me onto an elevator like I'm an idiot that can't board an elevator without a big strong man to help me. Beyond condescending.
You're in a cantankerous mood today. Must be your time of month. Anyway I can't hang around chatting to you as I need to have a chinwag with a spider.
Quote from: OldGit on July 17, 2012, 06:44:40 PM
People often hold doors for people.
Not usually these days in recognition of their female gender constituting a disability .
(I do wish we could talk about Saudi Arabia.
I really, really, really want to talk about Saudi Arabia. But...)
An addition.
I can see both viewpoints.
It is polite to hold the door for all regardless of age and sex. I do this and most appreciate it. Some do not. There is nothing sexist in my action because I do it equally for men and women. My rationale is that if I am carrying many things or in a hurry, I would hope someone would do the same for me.
However, Ali is right when she says that some men can be very sexist about the way they do it, as if the woman who is merely strolling through the door is a Lady Fair in need of Sir Lancelot to rescue her from the diabolical doorknob. Some males take an unusual amount of pride in having rendered such a great service. Is contemporary masculinity so weak that it can only be satisfied by door positioning?
It reminds me of an early 1960s Legion of Super-Heroes story. A group of male legionnaires and one female legionnaire ("Saturn Girl," although she is too old to be called a "girl") are battling their arch enemy, the Time Trapper. It looks as if the Legion will lose, and one of the males implores the Time Trapper: "Kill us, if you must. But spare Saturn Girl. She's a girl!"
Actually, Saturn Girl, who can mentally leap into a person's mind and take control of that person, is hardly in need of saving. Over the years, she has saved many of the boys many times.
Quote from: TheWalkingContradiction on July 17, 2012, 08:07:41 PM
(I do wish we could talk about Saudi Arabia.
I really, really, really want to talk about Saudi Arabia. But...)
{snip}
Then start a thread about Saudi Arabia!
RE-EDIT: I edited this post before I saw the one by Tank that follows. When he first saw it, only my first two paragraphs were here.Quote from: Tank on July 17, 2012, 08:17:57 PM
Quote from: TheWalkingContradiction on July 17, 2012, 08:07:41 PM
(I do wish we could talk about Saudi Arabia.
I really, really, really want to talk about Saudi Arabia. But...)
{snip}
Then start a thread about Saudi Arabia!
But this is a thread about Saudi Arabia. At least it was... Why do we need two?
Wouldn't it be more appropriate for this to remain a thread about Saudi Arabia (per the thread's title) and the discussion on holding doors to go to a new thread?
The nastiness in this thread is unsettling, and I am posting on door holding to try to smooth it out. I feel responsible, as a remark I made about women as queens (a remark that originally came from a Saudi student I was quoting, not something I agree with) derailed the topic and caused all this miscommunication. I wish I had not printed that quote, but I cannot take it back. All I can do is try to make nice, make peace, and get the topic back on track.
Quote from: TheWalkingContradiction on July 17, 2012, 08:19:32 PM
Quote from: Tank on July 17, 2012, 08:17:57 PM
Quote from: TheWalkingContradiction on July 17, 2012, 08:07:41 PM
(I do wish we could talk about Saudi Arabia.
I really, really, really want to talk about Saudi Arabia. But...)
{snip}
Then start a thread about Saudi Arabia!
But this is a thread about Saudi Arabia. At least it was... Why do we need two?
Wouldn't it be more appropriate for this to remain a thread about Saudi Arabia (per the thread's title) and the discussion on holding doors to go to a new thread?
Your logic is infallible. However logic never has held sway in forum land in my experience. I think this thread is irrevocably derailed. If you start a Saudi thread we'll keep it on track.
Quote from: En_Route on July 17, 2012, 07:59:56 PM
Quote from: Ali on July 17, 2012, 06:38:11 PM
Oh sorry, my lady brain got in a tizzy and forgot to answer the other part I wanted to address. Must be all that blood pooling in my womb and away from my brain, amiright?
I don't mind it when anyone holds the door for me. I smile and say thank you. However, I would not appreciate a strange man putting his hand on the small of my back and guiding me onto an elevator like I'm an idiot that can't board an elevator without a big strong man to help me. Beyond condescending.
You're in a cantankerous mood today. Must be your time of month. Anyway I can't hang around chatting to you as I need to have a chinwag with a spider.
*Clonks E_R over the head with a Jar of Something*
Quote from: Ali on July 17, 2012, 09:28:47 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 17, 2012, 07:59:56 PM
Quote from: Ali on July 17, 2012, 06:38:11 PM
Oh sorry, my lady brain got in a tizzy and forgot to answer the other part I wanted to address. Must be all that blood pooling in my womb and away from my brain, amiright?
I don't mind it when anyone holds the door for me. I smile and say thank you. However, I would not appreciate a strange man putting his hand on the small of my back and guiding me onto an elevator like I'm an idiot that can't board an elevator without a big strong man to help me. Beyond condescending.
You're in a cantankerous mood today. Must be your time of month. Anyway I can't hang around chatting to you as I need to have a chinwag with a spider.
*Clonks E_R over the head with a Jar of Something*
Note to self: Abandon all future attempts at irony.
Tank,
There is plenty of available material online, but the text I most often refer to is The Human Mind by Robert Winston. If you can find any excerpts online then be my guest. His research tells us that the testosterone in babies acts as an inhibitor to neural connections across the hemispheres of the brain. This means that the male brain (exposed to higher testosterone levels) has more intra-hemisphere neural connections (leading to a better capacity for mathematical thinking), and the female brain, well-connected across the hemispheres is better able to access emotions.
Whilst I do not know of any conflicting (or corroborating) research I have no particular reason to question the validity of this work. I trust you can accept this underpinning of my assertions.
I agree that Children, men, dogs, spiders and women all have different mental motivations (i didn't state otherwise) and it is sensible to relate to them all accordingly.
I do not expect to be treated the same, because I know I'm different. But if someone is to hypocritically expect equal, unprejudiced treatment when they are unwilling to demonstrate the same, I shall hold my own prejudiced ground. Surely that is only fair?
I don't do things because they are right, I do things because it suits me. It often suits me to do 'good' things, and sometimes not. But I do strive for equity and if I am not shown it, I will reciprocally react to achieve the balance I judge to be fair.
I do not deny that I am prejudiced. I make no apology for that - I'm a product of my surroundings. I argue that we all are. What I want is to get an admission that the women who cry 'sexism' are not immune from being tarred with the same brush when, in everyday life, subject their partners and other men to the same sexism. Before the whole issue can be fairly addressed this must be understood.
Quote from: TheWalkingContradiction on July 17, 2012, 08:19:32 PM
The nastiness in this thread is unsettling, and I am posting on door holding to try to smooth it out. I feel responsible, as a remark I made about women as queens (a remark that originally came from a Saudi student I was quoting, not something I agree with) derailed the topic and caused all this miscommunication. I wish I had not printed that quote, but I cannot take it back. All I can do is try to make nice, make peace, and get the topic back on track.
You are a very sweet and sensitive soul, aren't you? :D
Quote from: TheWalkingContradiction on July 17, 2012, 08:19:32 PM
RE-EDIT: I edited this post before I saw the one by Tank that follows. When he first saw it, only my first two paragraphs were here.
Quote from: Tank on July 17, 2012, 08:17:57 PM
Quote from: TheWalkingContradiction on July 17, 2012, 08:07:41 PM
(I do wish we could talk about Saudi Arabia.
I really, really, really want to talk about Saudi Arabia. But...)
{snip}
Then start a thread about Saudi Arabia!
But this is a thread about Saudi Arabia. At least it was... Why do we need two?
Wouldn't it be more appropriate for this to remain a thread about Saudi Arabia (per the thread's title) and the discussion on holding doors to go to a new thread?
The nastiness in this thread is unsettling, and I am posting on door holding to try to smooth it out. I feel responsible, as a remark I made about women as queens (a remark that originally came from a Saudi student I was quoting, not something I agree with) derailed the topic and caused all this miscommunication. I wish I had not printed that quote, but I cannot take it back. All I can do is try to make nice, make peace, and get the topic back on track.
TWC
Don't let any nastiness you may perceive upset you. The members participating in this thread know each other quite well. We have group Skype video calls now and again which you can join in as well. You're attempts to re-rail the thread are appreciated.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 09:42:22 PM
Tank,
There is plenty of available material online, but the text I most often refer to is The Human Mind by Robert Winston. If you can find any excerpts online then be my guest. His research tells us that the testosterone in babies acts as an inhibitor to neural connections across the hemispheres of the brain. This means that the male brain (exposed to higher testosterone levels) has more intra-hemisphere neural connections (leading to a better capacity for mathematical thinking), and the female brain, well-connected across the hemispheres is better able to access emotions.
Whilst I do not know of any conflicting (or corroborating) research I have no particular reason to question the validity of this work. I trust you can accept this underpinning of my assertions.
I agree that Children, men, dogs, spiders and women all have different mental motivations (i didn't state otherwise) and it is sensible to relate to them all accordingly.
I do not expect to be treated the same, because I know I'm different. But if someone is to hypocritically expect equal, unprejudiced treatment when they are unwilling to demonstrate the same, I shall hold my own prejudiced ground. Surely that is only fair?
I don't do things because they are right, I do things because it suits me. It often suits me to do 'good' things, and sometimes not. But I do strive for equity and if I am not shown it, I will reciprocally react to achieve the balance I judge to be fair.
I do not deny that I am prejudiced. I make no apology for that - I'm a product of my surroundings. I argue that we all are. What I want is to get an admission that the women who cry 'sexism' are not immune from being tarred with the same brush when, in everyday life, subject their partners and other men to the same sexism. Before the whole issue can be fairly addressed this must be understood.
I don't think you can believe that your opinions are prejudiced and that they are also correct. It would seem to follow that you don't believe what you are saying. The fact also remains that some men exhibit typically feminine mental traits and vice versa. It is also the case that our neural circuitry is not fixed and that we are not biologically predetermined, so that women can cultivate typically masculine traits and capabilities if they are so disposed, and again vice versa. Any form of stereotyping is pernicious because it does not take cognisance of the uniqueness and complexity of the individual. Prejudice leads to people being mistreated and hurt, be it religiously, racially or sexually based.
Quote from: En_Route on July 17, 2012, 09:32:16 PM
Quote from: Ali on July 17, 2012, 09:28:47 PM
Quote from: En_Route on July 17, 2012, 07:59:56 PM
You're in a cantankerous mood today. Must be your time of month. Anyway I can't hang around chatting to you as I need to have a chinwag with a spider.
*Clonks E_R over the head with a Jar of Something*
Note to self: Abandon all future attempts at irony.
SNORTAnyway, Scissorlegs, I think your fallacy here is taking the generalization too far. Yes, generally men have had more upper body strength, and heterosexual couples tend to fall into certain roles, ie the guy opening the stuck jar. But generalizations are never universal. For example, the woman who used to be my trainer at the gym could have kicked my puny ass anytime, and I'm sure open that jar more easily than me. Once you start applying generalizations to everybody, you're screwed, because you're always going to come across exceptions, probably lots of them. Check out the new CEO of Yahoo, for example. Or hey, lots of jokes are made on HAF about how all Americans own guns, and all our beer sucks. Also, that we're all religious nuts. There's certainly a good reason for those generalizations, but they're nowhere near universal, as I have shown, and many other people on this forum too.
Also, TWC, don't worry, we're all kinda nuts, and we all know it. This derail is nothing new.
Yeah, TWC. We're famous for our derails~ :P
Quote from: Ali on July 17, 2012, 09:44:57 PM
Quote from: TheWalkingContradiction on July 17, 2012, 08:19:32 PM
The nastiness in this thread is unsettling, and I am posting on door holding to try to smooth it out. I feel responsible, as a remark I made about women as queens (a remark that originally came from a Saudi student I was quoting, not something I agree with) derailed the topic and caused all this miscommunication. I wish I had not printed that quote, but I cannot take it back. All I can do is try to make nice, make peace, and get the topic back on track.
You are a very sweet and sensitive soul, aren't you? :D
I wish I were, but I know I am not. I try my best because I know how ridiculous, petty, divisive, and unfair I can be when I am riled (and how hyper-sensitive I am about gay issues and religious attacks on me). Teacher Mark (Mark being my real name and what my students call me since I do not permit "Professor" or "Mister") is a cool guy, but he is a creation of my mind, no more real than a fictional character. In my posts here, I employ my Teacher Mark personality. Teacher Mark is what I strive to be, but often Real Mark runs interference.
In this thread I saw an opportunity to explain something about contemporary Arabs (50% of my ethnicity and a significant percentage of my students, non-American family and friends) and perhaps end a few prejudiced thoughts. I am also well informed in Judaic Studies and neutral on any issue with Israel and Palestine; I would jump into a thread to alleviate anti-Semitic stereotypes for the same reason I do so with Arabs or Islam. Plus, one thing none of you knows about me yet is that the new language I am learning is Yiddish. Anything I can do to bring people together (particularly since evolution gave me a rather divisive nature I must fight against) is a
mekhaye (a pleasure - although the word can also mean a blesssing).
I just grieve that my attempts to alleviate stereotypes of Arabs have created stereotypes of women. I am also very sensitive regarding women's issues, as I consider myself a male with a woman's spirit, something I have trouble making other people understand. They assume that means I want surgery or I want to cross dress or I must be very effeminate. Actually, I have no desire to change my body or clothes, and I am quite straight acting; people are surprised when I say I am gay. As an example, when a colleague found out about my learning Yiddish, she said I must want to impress Jewish girls. (She had used the word "girls," which is why I use it.) "Men in my case," I explained, "and no, I would never learn a language just to get a date."
So yes, I find sexism very disturbing, and years ago I read a good book that called homophobia (whether directed at men or women) a weapon of sexism.
But the most important piece of information in all this... I came from the body of an Arab woman.
Thank you, Tank, Sweetdeath, and Firebird. It's a lot to take in, and it will probably be a while before I understand this board. Right now it seems very illogical and arbitrary, but I am sure that I will one day see logic (colored by a bit of illogic) and reason (colored by a bit of arbitrariness).
This board is a lot more sane and rational than most other ones, frankly. The mods do a great job, and people are passionate, but generally respectful. There were some strong opinions, maybe some you didn't like, but consider how many of us jumped in to decry what we perceived as sexism too. And no one called someone else names. Or called them Hitler. Or threatened to kick someone else's ass. Trust me, that's saying something for the internet :)
It's a pleasure to have someone as thoughtful and insightful as you on here, and I really hope you stick around.
Quote from: Firebird on July 17, 2012, 11:40:18 PM
This board is a lot more sane and rational than most other ones, frankly. The mods do a great job, and people are passionate, but generally respectful. There were some strong opinions, maybe some you didn't like, but consider how many of us jumped in to decry what we perceived as sexism too. And no one called someone else names. Or called them Hitler. Or threatened to kick someone else's ass. Trust me, that's saying something for the internet :)
It's a pleasure to have someone as thoughtful and insightful as you on here, and I really hope you stick around.
Seconded...
*____* TWC, I think i love you..
You seem like such a cool., cool , guy. And it's just extra great that you're a teacher.
Quote from: En_Route on July 17, 2012, 10:23:52 PM
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 09:42:22 PM
Tank,
There is plenty of available material online, but the text I most often refer to is The Human Mind by Robert Winston. If you can find any excerpts online then be my guest. His research tells us that the testosterone in babies acts as an inhibitor to neural connections across the hemispheres of the brain. This means that the male brain (exposed to higher testosterone levels) has more intra-hemisphere neural connections (leading to a better capacity for mathematical thinking), and the female brain, well-connected across the hemispheres is better able to access emotions.
Whilst I do not know of any conflicting (or corroborating) research I have no particular reason to question the validity of this work. I trust you can accept this underpinning of my assertions.
I agree that Children, men, dogs, spiders and women all have different mental motivations (i didn't state otherwise) and it is sensible to relate to them all accordingly.
I do not expect to be treated the same, because I know I'm different. But if someone is to hypocritically expect equal, unprejudiced treatment when they are unwilling to demonstrate the same, I shall hold my own prejudiced ground. Surely that is only fair?
I don't do things because they are right, I do things because it suits me. It often suits me to do 'good' things, and sometimes not. But I do strive for equity and if I am not shown it, I will reciprocally react to achieve the balance I judge to be fair.
I do not deny that I am prejudiced. I make no apology for that - I'm a product of my surroundings. I argue that we all are. What I want is to get an admission that the women who cry 'sexism' are not immune from being tarred with the same brush when, in everyday life, subject their partners and other men to the same sexism. Before the whole issue can be fairly addressed this must be understood.
I don't think you can believe that your opinions are prejudiced and that they are also correct. It would seem to follow that you don't believe what you are saying. The fact also remains that some men exhibit typically feminine mental traits and vice versa. It is also the case that our neural circuitry is not fixed and that we are not biologically predetermined, so that women can cultivate typically masculine traits and capabilities if they are so. Index and again vice versa. Any form of stereotyping is pernicious because it does not take cognisance of the uniqueness and complexity of the individual. Prejudice leads to people being mistreated and hurt, be it religious, racial or sexually based.
I am prejudiced in as much as I relate to women on the basis that they think like women. I see no reason to change this. I also relate to men, dogs and spiders similarly, respectively. I have the option to change my opinions on any individual once I have something more definite to work from. It has served me well so far. I don't mistreat anyone over that which is required to live my life well. I have no reason to change that, whatever you think.
Some of us acknowledge our prejudices and try to deal with them if we see them as unhelpful and some of us deny that we have any. Which are you?
You seem to consider that trying to change brain wiring to be a reasonable option. Can't we just be happy to accept who we are and celebrate that? And work to our strengths.
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 18, 2012, 12:00:42 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 17, 2012, 10:23:52 PM
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 17, 2012, 09:42:22 PM
Tank,
There is plenty of available material online, but the text I most often refer to is The Human Mind by Robert Winston. If you can find any excerpts online then be my guest. His research tells us that the testosterone in babies acts as an inhibitor to neural connections across the hemispheres of the brain. This means that the male brain (exposed to higher testosterone levels) has more intra-hemisphere neural connections (leading to a better capacity for mathematical thinking), and the female brain, well-connected across the hemispheres is better able to access emotions.
Whilst I do not know of any conflicting (or corroborating) research I have no particular reason to question the validity of this work. I trust you can accept this underpinning of my assertions.
I agree that Children, men, dogs, spiders and women all have different mental motivations (i didn't state otherwise) and it is sensible to relate to them all accordingly.
I do not expect to be treated the same, because I know I'm different. But if someone is to hypocritically expect equal, unprejudiced treatment when they are unwilling to demonstrate the same, I shall hold my own prejudiced ground. Surely that is only fair?
I don't do things because they are right, I do things because it suits me. It often suits me to do 'good' things, and sometimes not. But I do strive for equity and if I am not shown it, I will reciprocally react to achieve the balance I judge to be fair.
I do not deny that I am prejudiced. I make no apology for that - I'm a product of my surroundings. I argue that we all are. What I want is to get an admission that the women who cry 'sexism' are not immune from being tarred with the same brush when, in everyday life, subject their partners and other men to the same sexism. Before the whole issue can be fairly addressed this must be understood.
I don't think you can believe that your opinions are prejudiced and that they are also correct. It would seem to follow that you don't believe what you are saying. The fact also remains that some men exhibit typically feminine mental traits and vice versa. It is also the case that our neural circuitry is not fixed and that we are not biologically predetermined, so that women can cultivate typically masculine traits and capabilities if they are so. Index and again vice versa. Any form of stereotyping is pernicious because it does not take cognisance of the uniqueness and complexity of the individual. Prejudice leads to people being mistreated and hurt, be it religious, racial or sexually based.
I am prejudiced in as much as I relate to women on the basis that they think like women. I see no reason to change this. I also relate to men, dogs and spiders similarly, respectively. I have the option to change my opinions on any individual once I have something more definite to work from. It has served me well so far. I don't mistreat anyone over that which is required to live my life well. I have no reason to change that, whatever you think.
Some of us acknowledge our prejudices and try to deal with them if we see them as unhelpful and some of us , we have any. Which are seem to consider that trying to change brain wiring to be a reasonable option. Can't we just be happy to that who we are and celebrate that? And work to our strengths.
I would try to identify and weed out as best I can harmful or unhelpful thinking patterns. By definition it's impossible to know for sure how successfully I achieve that goal. I am 100% confident it's not 100%. On your other point, it's actually well- nigh impossible to avoid altering our neural circuitry, just by dint of the life- choices we make.
I would venture that many people want to learn and grow and master new insights and skills. That kind of striving is conducive to human happiness. Achievement normally does involve effort which may well entail to some extent going against the grain to get you where you want to be. Paradoxically, part who we are may often turn out to be the desire to be something more than we already are.
Quote from: TheWalkingContradiction on July 17, 2012, 11:27:06 PM
Quote from: Ali on July 17, 2012, 09:44:57 PM
Quote from: TheWalkingContradiction on July 17, 2012, 08:19:32 PM
The nastiness in this thread is unsettling, and I am posting on door holding to try to smooth it out. I feel responsible, as a remark I made about women as queens (a remark that originally came from a Saudi student I was quoting, not something I agree with) derailed the topic and caused all this miscommunication. I wish I had not printed that quote, but I cannot take it back. All I can do is try to make nice, make peace, and get the topic back on track.
You are a very sweet and sensitive soul, aren't you? :D
I wish I were, but I know I am not. I try my best because I know how ridiculous, petty, divisive, and unfair I can be when I am riled (and how hyper-sensitive I am about gay issues and religious attacks on me). Teacher Mark (Mark being my real name and what my students call me since I do not permit "Professor" or "Mister") is a cool guy, but he is a creation of my mind, no more real than a fictional character. In my posts here, I employ my Teacher Mark personality. Teacher Mark is what I strive to be, but often Real Mark runs interference.
In this thread I saw an opportunity to explain something about contemporary Arabs (50% of my ethnicity and a significant percentage of my students, non-American family and friends) and perhaps end a few prejudiced thoughts. I am also well informed in Judaic Studies and neutral on any issue with Israel and Palestine; I would jump into a thread to alleviate anti-Semitic stereotypes for the same reason I do so with Arabs or Islam. Plus, one thing none of you knows about me yet is that the new language I am learning is Yiddish. Anything I can do to bring people together (particularly since evolution gave me a rather divisive nature I must fight against) is a mekhaye (a pleasure - although the word can also mean a blesssing).
I just grieve that my attempts to alleviate stereotypes of Arabs have created stereotypes of women. I am also very sensitive regarding women's issues, as I consider myself a male with a woman's spirit, something I have trouble making other people understand. They assume that means I want surgery or I want to cross dress or I must be very effeminate. Actually, I have no desire to change my body or clothes, and I am quite straight acting; people are surprised when I say I am gay. As an example, when a colleague found out about my learning Yiddish, she said I must want to impress Jewish girls. (She had used the word "girls," which is why I use it.) "Men in my case," I explained, "and no, I would never learn a language just to get a date."
So yes, I find sexism very disturbing, and years ago I read a good book that called homophobia (whether directed at men or women) a weapon of sexism.
But the most important piece of information in all this... I came from the body of an Arab woman.
You bear no responsibility for the tenor of the discussion on gender roles, which as has already been been pointed out, was red- blooded but mostly pretty civilised. The threads here can go off on tangents in a blink, and the original point can be buried in a succession of anecdotes, meanderings or as in this case animated controversy. That is part of the seductive charm and at times the frustration of a non- dirigiste style of moderation, which on the whole seems to me to be laudable.
Quote from: En_Route on July 18, 2012, 12:21:25 AM
I would try to identify and weed out as best I can harmful or unhelpful thinking patterns. By definition it's impossible to know for sure how successfully I achieve that goal. I am 100% confident it's not 100%. On your other point, it's actually well- nigh impossible to avoid altering our neural circuitry, just by dint of the life- choices we make.
I would venture that many people want to learn and grow and master new insights and skills. That kind of striving is conducive to human happiness. Achievement normally does involve effort which may well entail to some extent going against the grain to get you where you want to be. Paradoxically, part who we are may often turn out to be the desire to be something more than we already are.
No wonder there's so much misery in the world - everyone chasing their tales...
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 18, 2012, 12:43:50 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 18, 2012, 12:21:25 AM
I would try to identify and weed out as best I can harmful or unhelpful thinking patterns. By definition it's impossible to know for sure how successfully I achieve that goal. I am 100% confident it's not 100%. On your other point, it's actually well- nigh impossible to avoid altering our neural circuitry, just by dint of the life- choices we make.
I would venture that many people want to learn and grow and master new insights and skills. That kind of striving is conducive to human happiness. Achievement normally does involve effort which may well entail to some extent going against the grain to get you where you want to be. Paradoxically, part who we are may often turn out to be the desire to be something more than we already are.
No wonder there's so much misery in the world - everyone chasing their tales...
The neuroscience as well as everyday observation suggests otherwise. Being engaged in pursuits that challenge, grip and engage us is a major ingredient in maintaining mental health and contentment. Putting yourself on a treadmill to achieve material success or status is not a recipe for joy.
Quote from: En_Route on July 18, 2012, 01:03:03 AM
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 18, 2012, 12:43:50 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 18, 2012, 12:21:25 AM
I would try to identify and weed out as best I can harmful or unhelpful thinking patterns. By definition it's impossible to know for sure how successfully I achieve that goal. I am 100% confident it's not 100%. On your other point, it's actually well- nigh impossible to avoid altering our neural circuitry, just by dint of the life- choices we make.
I would venture that many people want to learn and grow and master new insights and skills. That kind of striving is conducive to human happiness. Achievement normally does involve effort which may well entail to some extent going against the grain to get you where you want to be. Paradoxically, part who we are may often turn out to be the desire to be something more than we already are.
No wonder there's so much misery in the world - everyone chasing their tales...
The neuroscience as well as everyday observation suggests otherwise. Being engaged in pursuits that challenge, grip and engage us is a major ingredient in maintaining mental health and contentment. Putting yourself on a treadmill to achieve material success or status is not a recipe for joy.
Okay, flippant comment.
...but think of the money and status...! ;D
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 18, 2012, 01:30:14 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 18, 2012, 01:03:03 AM
Quote from: Scissorlegs on July 18, 2012, 12:43:50 AM
Quote from: En_Route on July 18, 2012, 12:21:25 AM
I would try to identify and weed out as best I can harmful or unhelpful thinking patterns. By definition it's impossible to know for sure how successfully I achieve that goal. I am 100% confident it's not 100%. On your other point, it's actually well- nigh impossible to avoid altering our neural circuitry, just by dint of the life- choices we make.
I would venture that many people want to learn and grow and master new insights and skills. That kind of striving is conducive to human happiness. Achievement normally does involve effort which may well entail to some extent going against the grain to get you where you want to be. Paradoxically, part who we are may often turn out to be the desire to be something more than we already are.
No wonder there's so much misery in the world - everyone chasing their tales...
The neuroscience as well as everyday observation suggests otherwise. Being engaged in pursuits that challenge, grip and engage us is a major ingredient in maintaining mental health and contentment. Putting yourself on a treadmill to achieve material success or status is not a recipe for joy.
Okay, flippant comment.
...but think of the money and status...!
Money up to a point, but status is a hard drug- it gives a false high and if you can't get your fix, you're fucked.
Quote from: TheWalkingContradiction on July 17, 2012, 11:29:18 PM
Thank you, Tank, Sweetdeath, and Firebird. It's a lot to take in, and it will probably be a while before I understand this board. Right now it seems very illogical and arbitrary, but I am sure that I will one day see logic (colored by a bit of illogic) and reason (colored by a bit of arbitrariness).
When you do understand it please explain it to me, because I don't :D
Quote from: Tank on July 18, 2012, 01:22:21 PM
Quote from: TheWalkingContradiction on July 17, 2012, 11:29:18 PM
Thank you, Tank, Sweetdeath, and Firebird. It's a lot to take in, and it will probably be a while before I understand this board. Right now it seems very illogical and arbitrary, but I am sure that I will one day see logic (colored by a bit of illogic) and reason (colored by a bit of arbitrariness).
When you do understand it please explain it to me, because I don't :D
Let's keep it that way.
Dammit! Why did I post that before I went on vacation.
Anyhoo, not to re-ignite the fire, but since Siz addressed me specifically, I'll just say that I never expect special treatment from men. I don't make my husband do all of the "man chores" (I unclog toilets/sinks myself, I change tires, I've chopped wood, etc.) And I never ask for "special treatment" when I'm on my period. What the hell would that be anyway? If I'm feeling badly, I pop pills like every other woman I know and go about my business. When I was pregnant, I didn't ask for any "special treatment" either, until I was literally as big as a house, when I'd maybe ask for a seat every now and again. But, really? That'd make me a hypocrite? I'm pretty sure if my husband's testicles were swollen to the point where he found it painful to walk, I'd offer him some comfortable seating, but I don't think that's a "sexist" issue, just a simple issue of acknowledging real biological limits (and no, I don't consider my entire experience as a woman a "biological limit").
Yes, my husband is stronger than me, so if we ever need to enter a weight-lifting contest together, I'm sure I'd have him do most of the competing. Other than that, how often do feats of strength really come into play in our lives? Not that often. We're not pioneers, we live in an apartment in the Ottawa-burbs. I'm sure our brains are wired-differently, as well, but all individuals have differently wired brains. In a relationship, I don't see how it makes much difference, because you don't relate to a "gender", you relate to a person. Understanding the uniqueness, strengths and weakness of that person is a million times more useful than generalizing that person into what you "expect" about their gender without further examination.
The same thing goes for the public sphere -- how is it helpful to treat women differently, beyond general politeness in public? Shouldn't you be polite to everyone? Shouldn't you try to help anyone if they seem to need assistance? Or, if you don't care about philanthropy, shouldn't you just say "fuck 'em" to everyone? Why are women special when it comes to doors? I just don't get it!
Like I said before, I'm not rude to people, and I don't assume the worst of every man that holds the door open for me. If they don't say anything or make any other indication, I assume that they're nice people (and I'm probably right most of the time). But, every now and then, you get the smarmy guy who thinks his patronizing is romantic and it bugs the shit out of me :P
Annnnnnnnnnnnnd now I'm going back to my vacation :P