Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

AlbertWu · Jun 19, 2002, 08:15 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Tigerabbit:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Monique:
The main difference is that most women let the emotions direct their decisions.<hr /></blockquote>Sorry, doesn't apply. My emotions direct decisions only when logic either fails, is not applicable, or cannot discern between two or more alternatives. Otherwise, logic and emotion serve as check-and-balance for each other. I suspect a lot of other people are similar, whether they recognize it or not.<hr /></blockquote>female brains are wired to use logic and emotion simultaneously. male brains are wired so that you use one at a time, not both. since logic tends to work better, we tend to use that first, and consider females' "mix" to be irrational (or so i've heard)

zigzag · Jun 19, 2002, 10:02 PM

Lerk, that's as lucid a description as I've ever seen. I would add some additional generalizations and some slightly different perspectives:

I consider myself a feminist. Although I grew up in a very traditional environment, it's never occurred to me that, generally speaking, women should not have the same opportunities as men. However, "equal" does not mean "equivalent". Men and women should generally have equal opportunities, but there are nonetheless significant differences in the way most men and women operate physiologically, emotionally, and cognitively.

I was around for the original feminist movement, which promoted the idea that men and women are just blank slates ("tabula rasa") and that if they're only treated the same, they'll have equivalent skill sets, values, emotional make-ups, etc. This was an understandable impulse - feminists were fighting some extremely strong stereotypes, and it was only natural that they would go to the opposite extreme. Progressive-minded parents started giving dolls to their sons, and playguns to their daughters, in the belief that their children would grow up free of stereotypical behaviors.

Fat chance. Anyone who's raised children, or been in a long-term relationship, knows intuitively that men and women are different emotionally and cognitively as well as physiologically. Indeed, a lot of men who identified intellectually with feminism and bought into the idea that men and women are equivalent were ultimately shocked to find out that their wives/girlfriends had these things called "feelings" that defied rational analysis. Similarly, a lot of women were shocked to learn that their progressive-minded husbands/boyfriends were just as obsessed with sex and were just as prone to chasing other women as their chauvinistic fathers and grandfathers.

Of course, as with most things, the truth is somewhere in between. Some of our stereotypical behavior is learned, and some of it is innate. And individual differences account for a lot. But the innate differences between the sexes are nonetheless significant, and anyone who pretends they don't exist is kidding themselves, IMO. Mother Nature created them for a reason, and you can't fool Mother Nature.

I think that post-feminists accept this, and I think it's refreshing in many respects. Madonna being one example. Of course, post-feminists haven't had to struggle like their feminist predecessors did.

Men, I think, are still quite confused about where they fit in, i.e. do I hold the door open or not. Life can be complicated.

I'm inclined to agree that women are, generally speaking, more emotional in nature than men. This isn't to say that women aren't just as capable of rational thought, and there may be more differences among individuals of each sex than there are between the sexes (for example, I know a women fighter pilot who I would trust with a decision before any men I know), but nonetheless I think it's true that, on average, women see and experience things through a somewhat different prism than men do. I think the mistake is not in acknowledging this, but in assigning a negative value to it. The world would be a lousy, boring place if we didn't have different perspectives on things.

A perfect example is lerkfish's description of the different approaches to problem-solving. I've seen this in action in my own life, and even had it explained to me by exceptionally smart and accomplished women, including women therapists. Women are more inclined to solve problems by venting and sharing their feelings, while men are more inclined to seek a logical, Spock-like, A-B-C solution, feelings be damned. Example: Wife: "I hate my boss. I hate my job." Husband: "Then why don't you quit?". Wife: "I hate my boss. I hate my job". Husband: "Um . . . then why don't you quit?". Wife: "I hate my boss. I hate my job." Husband: "Uh . . . OK - I guess I can't help, I'm gonna go cut the grass." Husband goes to garage, scratching his head, while wife sobs and, the following morning, acts as if it never happened and as if she can't get back to work soon enough.

It has nothing to do with intellectual capacity - I've had similar exchanges with women who are far smarter than I am. Nor is one approach necessarily better than another. It's just a very different way of dealing with things.

Regarding successful relationships, I would like to say that it depends on mutual respect, etc., and that if people with childhood issues could only overcome them, they would pick better partners, etc., and that if people only worked harder at them, their relationships would be more successful, etc. Unfortunately, while those things play a role, I'm sad to say that they only go so far. There are simply no reliable rules.

If anyone doesn't believe me, go immediately to the "Relationships/Self-Help" section at Borders (which represents a tiny fraction of all the books published on the subject) and ask yourself: "If there were really a solution to the problem of relationships, would we really need all of these books and all of these psychologists, and why is it that after million of years of relationships, we still can't figure them out, not even a little bit?" I think the answer is self-evident. It can't be done. It's not even meant to be done.

I don't know a single person who doesn't have "childhood issues". Most people can't really change, nor should they necessarily want to. To paraphrase Freud, it's largely our complexes and obsessions that make us unique and interesting. You can act purely on instinct and get good results, and you can read every relationship book and consult every shrink on the planet and get bad results. Or vice versa.

The bottom line, IMO, is that chemistry and luck are still the main factors. A relationship can work well or not work well for a million different, indefinable reasons, and at different times. I know people who are happily married for reasons that would seem alien to any thinking person, and I know smart, educated people who couldn't sustain a relationship to save their lives. Books and therapists (and religion, for those so inclined) can help to a degree, but if a relationship isn't giving both people what they want, no amount of work or study can fix it.

All my opinion. Subject to change without notice.

kndonlee · Jun 19, 2002, 11:18 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Regarding successful relationships, I would like to say that it depends on mutual respect , etc.<hr /></blockquote>In all relationships, everyone is unique and different in all of their own ways. You see, the way one has grown up, reacted, learned, and observed from their enviroment has placed a map in our minds. A map of reality.

You see, there is reality. The plain stated this is this and this is that. And then there's a unique map that all of us have in order to see, comprehend, analyze and understand the reality we live in. This map is what we think and observe reality to be. It is the compilation of our relatinoships, experiences, observations, and reactions. Then on top of that is is our glasses that enable us to see the map. The glasses we put on is our perspective. That is what drives one to say, "The cup is half full." while it drives another to say, "The cup is half empty." These are both facts, however, perspective driving these facts can cause different people to come to different conclusions.

And perspective, a frame of reference, a guidepost, plays such an important roll in the ways, people react with each other. And sometimes, it is the good balance between two people, with glasses and maps that match and complement each other that, they "clik!"

Mutual Respect is what I call a pregnant word. It just doesn't end at the dictionary definition of two people having "regard for one's standing or position." Regard only means to take notice, not understand. "Mutual Respect" gives unending birth to what respect is all about. That respect not only drives us to notice someone's position, but then goes a step further in understanding, and truly giving a heads up to the other's perspective. It often takes more than another pair of glasses and a set of maps to be in the other person's shoes. It can take a lifetime, just to even come close to understanding how another person's map is. Because each of our maps have taken a lifetime to make, it often takes a lifetime of understanding to even come close to truly realizing where someone else comes from. Not that I'm saying everyone single person you meet will take a million years to learn about, but saying how perspectives can differ.

And when man and wife have differing perspectives, which everyone has. It's easier to just tolerate what the other person does, rather than to authentically and seriously consider the other person's shoes. That's why we so often we say, "You'll understand what we mean when you get there." That is said by parents, by bosses, by leaders, by everyone... But when we as people err and just tolerate, we make a big mistake. Cause toleration, only goes so far, and usually leads to people getting fed up and discouraged. "Oh I didn't know they were like that!." is what often people say about one another after living a lifetime together and still learning new things about that person, pleasant or unpleasant things that it may be. It was mostly our ignorance as people, just tolerating one fact, that led to the overshadowing of another, rather than striving for a true understanding of the other person... When we can truly respect someone for who they are, we become lighthoues in their lives, where our affirmation and criticism play such a big role. Respect is not just saying, "that's how you think it is? great." It is saying, you are who you are.

"You are who you are. Strive to be that someone."

And when we can truly, authentically say that about someone, that is when we can accept and understand, rather than tolerate and say we accept and understand.

Too often with positive attitudes and positive speaking, we try to change the other person in hopes of them seeing a different perspective. We say, "you can do it, you can accomplish it. We believe in you. You are filled with so much potential." In actuality many people would take that as, "Since you suck at whatever you're doing, we're trying to give you positive attitude and positive influence so you change your thinking. But really, you suck." Respect will enable you to let the other person falter for a little bit, and find their way.

Mutual Respect - It goes farther than just toleration. It will take as long as it takes to build the other person's map to really know what it means to get into the other person's shoes.

My Perspective on Perspective and Respect

[ 06-19-2002, 11:38 PM: Message edited by: kndonlee ]

spivey · Jun 20, 2002, 12:56 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by andi*pandi:
4. The few girls I know who still act, well, girly, do it because they think men like it--men feel more macho around wimpy little girls. (I call them girls because they haven't earned the right to be called women.) Example: the girl who introduced me to my husband told me before the first date, "wear something pink, that outfit you wore last week, men like that." Thank god I didn't listen and wore jeans and my leather jacket! He wasn't like the men she dated at all, for which I'm extremely grateful... her men always loved and left her, played mind games, were inaccessable, and basically just wanted sex. I got the much better deal. Without wearing pink.<hr /></blockquote> <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Millennium:
Not all women are "girly" because they think men like it. Femme lesbians would be the easiest example to point out, but others exist. You're right, though, that most are simply out to catch a man.
But, who can blame them? Go to any supermarket and look at the covers for magazines like Cosmopolitan, Vogue, Elle, or whatever equivalents they happen to carry (and carry them they most certainly will). I dare you to find any such magazine that does not have "How To Drive Him Wild In Bed" or "How To Trap the Man of Your Dreams" or something to that effect on the cover, every single issue, every single month. And these magazines are supposed to be progressive?<hr /></blockquote>Those are valid points, but I don't see a problem with someone "flaunting it" a bit if they're confident in thier appearance, comfortable with what they're wearing, and more importantly comfortable with themself. Flaunt it if your comfortable flaunting it. The same rule that applies to women wearing revealing clothing which some may deem "slutty", also applies to men.

Some men go to the gym and lift weights and build huge muscles. Some of these guys are real befitting of the stereotype "musclehead" (i.e. all braun and no brain) and some actually are quite intelligent. But upon "first glance" at one of these people, many would rather jump all over the stereotype than the reality.

Some people choose to show it off a bit, some don't, but if they want to show it off, why not? Same for women. A persons level of comfort in thier appearance or confidence in the way they look doesn't say anything one way or another about what type of person they are whether it be intelligent, witty, kind, considerate or a complete dumb a**hole. You can't judge a book by it's cover, but sometimes it's the cover we are attracted to at first, before we ever go through the "getting to know you" process.

andi*pandi · Jun 20, 2002, 09:05 AM

hey tony:

Is your current chick skinny and bright?

You get points for wanting bright, but it seems you're always fighting, or complaining about her... is she also grumpy? Ya know, some skinny chicks get grumpy from all that pesky dieting and exercise... the pressure to be skinny is stressful. Get her a little chocolate, it soothes the soul!

and Ben and Jerry's... is just like prozac... mmmm....

<whistling softly, andi*pandi sidles away, hoping no one noticed that her hidden agenda of fat acceptance may be related to pregnancy-related pounds...) <img border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" title="" src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" />

[ 06-20-2002, 09:06 AM: Message edited by: andi*pandi ]

Tigerabbit · Jun 20, 2002, 10:15 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by andi*pandi:
�Get her a little chocolate, it soothes the soul!

and Ben and Jerry's... is just like prozac... mmmm....<hr /></blockquote>Gee, thanks. Now I have to go get some ice cream. Thanks a lot. I'm going to be an even bigger pig, and it's all your fault.

TonyRado · Jun 20, 2002, 01:16 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by andi*pandi:
hey tony:
Is your current chick skinny and bright?
<hr /></blockquote>Erm, IMO . . . she's neither. But fortunately for her, she has her own Personal Critic� . . . ME!

<img src="http://www.arches.uga.edu/~kevnwill/jackass.jpg" alt=" - " />
. . . HEEEHHAAAWWWWW!!!

Monique · Jun 20, 2002, 04:42 PM

Some say women are as intelligent as men but in an emotional way, with the heart. Of course there are exceptions to the rule. When I say that emotions rule the life of a woman it is because I have the experience of it. For example, I tried with the owner of my condo, Claire, not to pay my last month rent in exchange of my damage deposit, she flew off the handle and she started to threatened me and say things like don't **** with me. Now a man would not have reacted like that he would have said is there any damages no and you have proven that you are honest so of course we can do it.

mattstoton · Jun 21, 2002, 10:56 AM

I agree with Monique.