Effeminate Behavior

  • Thread starter Thread starter OrangeOwl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

OrangeOwl

Guest
Please see: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=701428

Does his answer bother anyone else?

I suppose my main issue is that I don’t necessary agree with the premise that this is always a learned behavior.

Moreover, the idea of certain behaviors reserved for males and certain behaviors reserved for females just… bothers me. I understand the importance of gender roles, but is it ok that I think this might be taking it a little overboard?
 
Father Serpa states that:
Mannerisms are learned
Click to expand...
Mannerisms may be defined as a habitual or characteristic manner, mode, or way of doing something; distinctive quality or style, as in behavior or speech:

What we are speaking about is the way people behave in actions. For instance my little grandchild mouths the word no and shakes her head. This action or mannerism is the same way her sister answers no and the same way her mother does. I also notice I answer no the same way. I am debating if it came from the children first and we imitated them or they learned this mannerism from me. :o
I can’t think of a mannerism that wouldn’t be learned can you? Haven’t you been told that look is just like your dad’s or that laugh is like your mom’s.
 
I’m not sure that effeminate mannerisms are learned.

I’ve taught school long enough to see a few boys develop effeminate mannerisms and they didn’t seem to realize they were doing so.
 
I think it’s sad. I tend to have masculine mannerisms and a masculine speech pattern, (as well as masculine interests and hobbies). No one ever tries to tell me to change. In fact, most guys think I’m great. I do look and dress very feminine though.

It’s unfair to hold men to a different standard. Besides, what do mannerisms really count for? They don’t say anything about how strong, honorable, honest, kind, or clever someone is. That’s on the same superficial level as appearances.
 
OrangeOwl said:
Please see: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=701428

Does his answer bother anyone else?

I suppose my main issue is that I don’t necessary agree with the premise that this is always a learned behavior.

Moreover, the idea of certain behaviors reserved for males and certain behaviors reserved for females just… bothers me. I understand the importance of gender roles, but is it ok that I think this might be taking it a little overboard?
Click to expand...
I think the problem is that the question is extremely vague. The poster did not clarify what sort of “effeminate behavior” he was concerned about and Father Serpa seemed to conclude that the poster was exhibiting behaviors that negated his appropriate gender role. For all we know, the poster could have been refering to his enjoyment of playing piano, his talent for cooking a souffle, or a taste for an abundance of hair product. (All of which can be fit into an the gender role of a husband and father.)

Not every man needs to be a rifle-toating, elk-hunting, cowboy-hat-wearing, stereotype that would rather be burned alive than caught singing out loud in church. (Likewise, not all women need to be a stay-at-home-mother/Barbie doll that has to put on a full-face of cosmetics before setting out for the gym in order to suit their gender role.)

The mark of a real man is that he serves the Lord, loves and respects his wife, and actively teaches his children to be righteous people. That is the male gender role.
 
BlueEyedLady said:
I think it’s sad. I tend to have masculine mannerisms and a masculine speech pattern, (as well as masculine interests and hobbies). No one ever tries to tell me to change. In fact, most guys think I’m great. I do look and dress very feminine though.

It’s unfair to hold men to a different standard. Besides, what do mannerisms really count for? They don’t say anything about how strong, honorable, honest, kind, or clever someone is. That’s on the same superficial level as appearances.
Click to expand...
You may not had anyone say to your face you should change however, I did. So men aren’t being held to a different standard. It is indeed superficial and I agree that it shouldn’t count but that is not the real world unfortunately.
 
Allegra said:
The mark of a real man is that he serves the Lord, loves and respects his wife, and actively teaches his children to be righteous people. That is the male gender role.
Click to expand...
👍 The same is true for a real woman that she serves the Lord, loves and respects her husband, and actively teaches his children to be righteous people.
 
triumphguy said:
I’m not sure that effeminate mannerisms are learned.

I’ve taught school long enough to see a few boys develop effeminate mannerisms and they didn’t seem to realize they were doing so.
Click to expand...
Perhaps this is the basis of the debate, then – the way that ya’ll are understanding the term “learned”. I think that, for those taking offense with the notion, it seems that “learned” implies an active role – an intentional choice leading to an active acquisition of a desired outcome.

However, it seems to me that, in this context, “learned” simply means “acquired”: no presumption of an intentional choice, or the necessity of a desired outcome, or the requirement that there’s an active attempt at acquisition. Instead, just ‘acquired’, due to whatever reasons.

Triumphguy, it seems that you implicitly acknowledge this: you state that a few boys develop effeminate mannerisms – not that they always exhibit them.

At first blush, this makes sense: after all, no one comes out of the womb exhibiting male or female behaviors, per se. So, for whatever the set of causes, this is a developmental phenomenon – and one that is culturally conditioned, to boot!

Hope this helps…

Blessings,

G.
 
adrift said:
You may not had anyone say to your face you should change however, I did. So men aren’t being held to a different standard. It is indeed superficial and I agree that it shouldn’t count but that is not the real world unfortunately.
Click to expand...
Well in the real world I’m marrying a wonderful man who is the best friend I could ever have and who loves me for me. My more masculine traits have given me some fantastic professional opportunities, and I have a very strong group of friends who love me as I am.

Why change?

And why should a more effeminate man change? He could find the same life I have. We are all different, and for good reason.
 
Like it or not, there are numerous psychological studies, not just in the US, but in several
European Countries as well, about male effeminate behavior. They all state that such behavior is almost always the result of the subjet being raised in a household that either has a dominant female and a weak, ineffectual male head of the home or a home in which there is no male present for the subject effeminate male to pattern his behavior after.
Whether we accept these facts or not, effeminate male behavior has definately adverse socio-economic effects on these individuals in Western Society.
Although I can’t speak for Asian Society as a whole, I can definately state that such behavior is absolutely not tolerated in Japan. Japanese Society believes it is taboo for people of the same sex to touch each other. That is why the bow instead of shaking hands (the only time they shake hands is when dealing with Americans or Europeans) and the barbers in a mens barber shop are all women and the Hair dressers in a beauty salon are all male. An effeminate male in Japan would be ostracised, and would be denied an education and be all but unemployable.
 
Allegra said:
I think the problem is that the question is extremely vague. The poster did not clarify what sort of “effeminate behavior” he was concerned about and Father Serpa seemed to conclude that the poster was exhibiting behaviors that negated his appropriate gender role. For all we know, the poster could have been refering to his enjoyment of playing piano, his talent for cooking a souffle, or a taste for an abundance of hair product. (All of which can be fit into an the gender role of a husband and father.)

Not every man needs to be a rifle-toating, elk-hunting, cowboy-hat-wearing, stereotype that would rather be burned alive than caught singing out loud in church. (Likewise, not all women need to be a stay-at-home-mother/Barbie doll that has to put on a full-face of cosmetics before setting out for the gym in order to suit their gender role.)

The mark of a real man is that he serves the Lord, loves and respects his wife, and actively teaches his children to be righteous people. That is the male gender role.
Click to expand...
I totally agree. So I suppose there is some sort of line that shouldn’t be crossed in regards to gender roles, but that line hasn’t really been agreed on.

I mean, on the other side of the extreme, we can agree that cross-dressing is wrong. But is a boy playing with barbies acceptable? How about a gothic teenager wearing mascara? Does it all boil down to acceptable societal standards (analogous to the modesty standards)?
 
George_Stegmeir said:
Japanese Society believes it is taboo for people of the same sex to touch each other. That is why the bow instead of shaking hands (the only time they shake hands is when dealing with Americans or Europeans) and the barbers in a mens barber shop are all women and the Hair dressers in a beauty salon are all male. An effeminate male in Japan would be ostracised, and would be denied an education and be all but unemployable.
Click to expand...
That’s curious, considering being a male hairdresser is generally not known as a masculine field of work.
 
OrangeOwl said:
Please see: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=701428

Does his answer bother anyone else?

I suppose my main issue is that I don’t necessary agree with the premise that this is always a learned behavior.

Moreover, the idea of certain behaviors reserved for males and certain behaviors reserved for females just… bothers me. I understand the importance of gender roles, but is it ok that I think this might be taking it a little overboard?
Click to expand...
I think there is a difference between gentle and effeminate.

A man can definitely be gentle, compassionate, tender, and so on. I think many times people define these characteristics as being “effeminate.” But if a male is truly acting effeminate, that is something different. It means he is acting like a female, that he doesn’t identify with other males, and that he is possible afraid of his masculinity.
It’s not to say, he can’t enjoy “typical” activities one usually associates with females. But if he is identifying with females rather than men, that’s concerning.

Men are men, and women are women. Some of the most gentle, compassionate, tender men I have known are also very masculine.
 
BlueEyedLady said:
Well in the real world I’m marrying a wonderful man who is the best friend I could ever have and who loves me for me. My more masculine traits have given me some fantastic professional opportunities, and I have a very strong group of friends who love me as I am.

Why change?

And why should a more effeminate man change? He could find the same life I have. We are all different, and for good reason.
Click to expand...
We are not in disagreement. What I did disagree with you is that masculine behavior by females is accepted. You have experienced it in this way. I was trying to point out that this is not universal. I am glad you have had no problem but I have.
 
OrangeOwl said:
I totally agree. So I suppose there is some sort of line that shouldn’t be crossed in regards to gender roles, but that line hasn’t really been agreed on.

I mean, on the other side of the extreme, we can agree that cross-dressing is wrong. But is a boy playing with barbies acceptable? How about a gothic teenager wearing mascara? Does it all boil down to acceptable societal standards (analogous to the modesty standards)?
Click to expand...
My brothers played with Barbies. That’s why all my Barbies had their hair shorn off and several were missing limbs. Kids will play with what they have to play with. My brothers also played “house” with us. They were usually the kidnappers. I think that if a boy has a good father for a role-model, then his choice of playthings isn’t really that important. I find the mascara thing less worrysome because of it being effeminate and more disturbing because it indicates a rather dark outlook on life.
 
adrift said:
We are not in disagreement. What I did disagree with you is that masculine behavior by females is accepted. You have experienced it in this way. I was trying to point out that this is not universal. I am glad you have had no problem but I have.
Click to expand...
Oh no! I apologize for jumping down your throat. My bad.

Ok, I get what you’re saying.
 
adrift said:
We are not in disagreement. What I did disagree with you is that masculine behavior by females is accepted. You have experienced it in this way. I was trying to point out that this is not universal. I am glad you have had no problem but I have.
Click to expand...
You know. I was thinking about this and I notice that alot of the behaviors that most people consider “effeminate” in men are not really flattering characteristics of women either. For example, being whinny, clingy, over-emotional, petty, obsessed with clothes or appearance, are traits that would be called “girly” in a man. None of these traits are really positive aspects of womanhood either. They might be more socially accepted flaws in women, but no man says, “Gee, my girlfriend is so emotionally reactive! It’s so hot!” By the same token, traits that are considered extremely masculine in women are not neccessarily positive aspects of manhood. (ie. selfishness, boisterous behavior, agressiveness etc.)
 
This discussion reminds of a remarkable book I read ten-fifteen years ago called "The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity. (The author is Leon J. Podles.)

Podles argues that Christianity has become increasingly feminized (-he doesn’t mean in the last few decades but over several centuries.) I spent time in seminary and did parish work and I noticed something that Podles had mentioned: a) priests spend more time with women than with men (-most of the people working in most parishes are female: pick up a church bulletin and the contact names for services / events / ministries are overwhelmingly female, as are parish office staffs) and b) many men, and especially the more masculine ones, have little respect for priests as men. They tend to think of them as thinking more like women than men.

We sometimes forget that Christianity has always appealed more to women than to men. (This was unusual for an ancient religion.) Podles was the first person I read who said—this is a paraphrase, not a quote–‘churches spend too much effort trying to increase their appeal to women when they’ve always had a majority of female members: their problem lies in appealing to men, especially single men (-and now, divorced ones, many of whom stop going to Mass after getting a divorce.)’

This doesn’t directly address the question of the OP, but I think it germane. Priests should know that they will always have more women than men in their parishes and that the people they are most likely to lose are male, not female. Overly effeminate behavior doesn’t help the women and it tends to alienate men.
 
OrangeOwl said:
Please see: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=701428

Does his answer bother anyone else?

I suppose my main issue is that I don’t necessary agree with the premise that this is always a learned behavior.

Moreover, the idea of certain behaviors reserved for males and certain behaviors reserved for females just… bothers me. I understand the importance of gender roles, but is it ok that I think this might be taking it a little overboard?
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree that this answer may be a little overboard. I will not go any further than that though, as disagreeing with an apologist is grounds for excommunication from these forums. I am going to privately follow up with Fr. Serpa, however.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top