Gender Mainstreaming

[pumpkinbeast]

lol–
I think girls playing ‘‘traditionally’’ male sports like hockey, being on an all girls team for example, is morally neutral. It’s when a girl wants to be on the boy’s hockey team, that is the problem…that is where the feminist agenda wants to go. It literally wants to destroy male-ness in our society…but the irony is…why do they suggest women should ‘be’ like men? They hate men, but want to be like men? :ehh:

I’d be very angry too if I were THAT confused in life.

I feel very sorry for many feminists who believe this though…because they truly believe that they are missing out on ‘‘something.’’ They are somehow losing, and the men are winning. It’s a shame to go through life, always wishing you were something or someone else.

The bold above is what gets me thinking a lot. In a lot of ways, women have achieved better equality with men, but seemingly at the expense of their more ‘feminine’ qualities. Sure, you can have a career now, but you have to do it the way men do it: not the primary care-giver for children at home, heck, don’t even have kids, because that will cut into your career; behave aggressively, be tall, be outspoken, etc. Some of these qualities should be gender-neutral, but the way that men and women approach life and jobs tends to be fundamentally different, patriarchal and matriarchal ways of looking at things, and the like. It’s like the men were like, okay ladies, come on in, but you have to behave like us and order your life the way we do if you want to do well outside of the ‘traditional’ female role of being a homemaker.
This is HUGELY evident in the medical field, I’ve learned. Doctors are mostly men(though that is changing now) and nurses are mostly women. There are more nurses than doctors. However, doctors have had way more say in health policies and the like in Canada than nurses have, and I think it has a lot to do with the fact that nurses are mainly women, and if they want things changed, they don’t approach it the way men do, so the administrators, who are again, mainly men, don’t notice. This is my hypothesis, anyway. Also, male nurses are over-represented in nursing admin positions compared to the percentage of male nurses overall.
These are the things that bumble about in my brain, anyway, and I know I’m over-simplifying some stuff, etc, whatever. But I do think the world is going to need a radical change in thought in order to be able to truly treat men and women equitably, and it will take a lot to sort out what qualities in people are ‘gender neutral’ and what aspects are inherently ‘male’ and ‘female’. It’s a huge philosophical and theological puzzle.

 

[jwashu]

“Gender mainstreaming is the public policy concept of assessing the different implications for women and men of any planned policy action, including legislation and programs in all areas and levels.” (from Wikipedia)

This sounds quite innocent, but it is part of the feminist scheme to mandate elimination of all distinctions between men and women. This is done in the name of gender equality. The underlying values, though, are the dismantling of traditional roles for men and women, and the destruction of traditional family life.

Gender mainstreaming is favored by the United Nations, feminist organizations, and women’s rights groups. They wish to ban the “Patriarchal family model” and to remove gender roles from kindergardens and elementary schools.

The term, “Gender mainstreaming,” was new to me. Why haven’t we heard more about this scheme?

You are reading to much into this… or reading a conspiracy theory from some far right blog on this…

My suggestion, before defending what someone is telling you is the traditional “Patriarchal family model” check and see if you, if the Church and if you think God agrees with that “model.”

Lets start with the fact that man is to love his wife as Christ loved the Church… dose that fit in the model this person is suggesting… maybe… maybe not though. What did Christ do for the Church and for us?

There were times when a man physically had to do certain things because of sheer strength right? So men should be the big guy bowing up all the time and showing his aggression and that supports the idea that women should obey! Well first of all see the previous paragraph (I believe Christ is talking about equality and mutual giving in marriage not taking) but many people often leave out the fact that in those primitive communism societies, the women pretty much ran everything, they were often matriarchal because the men were out chasing animals.

People say, oh women have equal rights, that was done in the 60s! No they don’t… and it’s not some “plot.” As someone mentioned that they hold the door for a man or a women because it’s a nice thing to do, they have the right idea. It’s not because either sex is better. Today men and women can both do many of the same jobs in our technical society and thus in the home many families share the load if they both work yet in the workplace women still earn less than men for the same job… and just like that door, it shouldn’t matter who is coming through, it should matter if they can do the job and do it well.

There is a rash of conspiracy theories lately that there is some left wing plot going to “destroy” the family coming from a few very vocal angry people with an agenda. Don’t buy into it. Some of these same people were crying in the 90s but shut up as they watched millions lose their homes because of the greed they promoted. Now they are back trying to convince people that civil liberties and equality are somehow bad ideas, they are not, they are what this nation was founded upon, we have just expanded those ideas over time and will continue in the future. Never forget that our founding Fathers were a bunch of East Cost Ivy and European Educated Liberals who hid out in secret societies so they could discuss their ideas of liberty and equality because they were so “bad” at the time.

Remember that 100 years ago women couldn’t even vote and many children were denied an education because they were working in factories… Child labor laws and woman’s suffrage were good things. Just like one day people will look back and say… wow, you know taking care of people and providing them medicine… that was a good thing, just like paying people (regardless of their sex) was a good thing too. Just as we today can’t really imagine a world where I kids where to work rather than school and women couldn’t vote, so too will there be a day where “people” are paid for the job, not because of their sex and everyone can go to the Dr. when they are sick.

Personally I long for those days… since I took the day off to take care of sick kids, I think I’ll go change a diaper and clean the kitchen before I get ready to cook dinner because my wife had meetings today and I didn’t… but you know what? I still make more money and I don’t think that’s fair.

Joe

 

[whatevergirl]

The bold above is what gets me thinking a lot. In a lot of ways, women have achieved better equality with men, but seemingly at the expense of their more ‘feminine’ qualities. Sure, you can have a career now, but you have to do it the way men do it: not the primary care-giver for children at home, heck, don’t even have kids, because that will cut into your career; behave aggressively, be tall, be outspoken, etc. Some of these qualities should be gender-neutral, but the way that men and women approach life and jobs tends to be fundamentally different, patriarchal and matriarchal ways of looking at things, and the like. It’s like the men were like, okay ladies, come on in, but you have to behave like us and order your life the way we do if you want to do well outside of the ‘traditional’ female role of being a homemaker.
This is HUGELY evident in the medical field, I’ve learned. Doctors are mostly men(though that is changing now) and nurses are mostly women. There are more nurses than doctors. However, doctors have had way more say in health policies and the like in Canada than nurses have, and I think it has a lot to do with the fact that nurses are mainly women, and if they want things changed, they don’t approach it the way men do, so the administrators, who are again, mainly men, don’t notice. This is my hypothesis, anyway. Also, male nurses are over-represented in nursing admin positions compared to the percentage of male nurses overall.
These are the things that bumble about in my brain, anyway, and I know I’m over-simplifying some stuff, etc, whatever. But I do think the world is going to need a radical change in thought in order to be able to truly treat men and women equitably, and it will take a lot to sort out what qualities in people are ‘gender neutral’ and what aspects are inherently ‘male’ and ‘female’. It’s a huge philosophical and theological puzzle.

*Well, I’ve been in the business world for a while…I never felt the ‘need’ to act like a man. But, I have seen that–you are right! (I think being a doctor is morally neutral, like a girl playing ice hockey, but I know what you are saying)

I think unfortunately, many feminists have bought into the lie that being a woman…simply isn’t good enough. I love being a woman, I would never want to be a man. lol God doesn’t make mistakes…He created men and women to serve each other, and to do that in our differences. Deep down, I think many radical feminists are angry at their dads. It’s just a hunch, I have always had. *

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

I don’t think anyone’s argued that women don’t deserve the same opportunities as men in this thread Whatevergirl.

The only thing I’m against is a society where you’re not supposed to acknowledge any differences. I won’t do that. I insist on walking on the outside when on a sidewalk. I open doors. I offer women an escort home at night. I always stand in subways or buses if there are any women (or children, or elderly for that matter) who aren’t seated. Et cetera. If women want to take this kind of behavior as an insult to their independence, I’m sorry. It’s not intended as such.

Thank you, I appreciate gentlemanly behavior very much.

 

[CountrySinger]

*lol–
I think girls playing ‘‘traditionally’’ male sports like hockey, being on an all girls team for example, is morally neutral. It’s when a girl wants to be on the boy’s hockey team, that is the problem…that is where the feminist agenda wants to go. It literally wants to destroy male-ness in our society…but the irony is…why do they suggest women should ‘be’ like men? They hate men, but want to be like men? :ehh:

I’d be very angry too if I were THAT confused in life.

I feel very sorry for many feminists who believe this though…because they truly believe that they are missing out on ‘‘something.’’ They are somehow losing, and the men are winning. It’s a shame to go through life, always wishing you were something or someone else. *

I play on a woman’s rugby team, and we only play with other women. But it does results in men watching us a lot. It is a good workout, and it relieves stress. I wouldn’t want to play on a mixed team, too much touching and tackling. It is a very rough game, but I love it. After practice, I dress in my feminine clothes, do my hair and makeup, and go on my stress relieved way.

 

[whatevergirl]

*There’s a lot of professions now, where women make more money than or as much as men, doing the same job…I think a lot has changed on that front…at least where I work. *

 

[whatevergirl]

I play on a woman’s rugby team, and we only play with other women. But it does results in men watching us a lot. It is a good workout, and it relieves stress. I wouldn’t want to play on a mixed team, too much touching and tackling. It is a very rough game, but I love it. After practice, I dress in my feminine clothes, do my hair and makeup, and go on my stress relieved way.

Yes, it’s morally neutral. I think if you are athletically blessed…go for it. Not all guys for example play sports, either…does that make less than masculine? No. Same thing. Not all guys like to drink beer, and hoot and holler are a football game, either…Does that make them less than men? No. We could go on and on with this, you know.

 

[Ridgerunner]

What specifically about this offends you? Would it bother you if some elementary school boys learned cooking and sewing and some girls learned woodworking?

What if some boys really like cooking and some girls really like woodworking? Are you going to stand there and tell them to know their place? This, and maybe creating sports teams for girls as well as promoting math and science education for girls is the only thing I can imagine this being used for.

And the patriarchal family model they’re looking to “ban” is the kind that exists in Muslim countries where women are married off often without their consent, perhaps to much older men, and are treated like domestic slaves. I doubt anyone considers a marriage in a Western country patriarchal.

I think your last paragraph overstates it. Let’s talk about what’s real.

As to the first paragraph, I noted recently that my 13 year old grandson’s art class was assigned to do needlepoint and some knitting. My grandson absolutely hated it and finally prevailed on his mother to do it for him. Later he learned that every single boy in his class had done the same thing.

When raising our children, my wife and I were careful to be sure our girls had trucks and other “boy toys” to play with and that my son had at least one doll. The only truly pristine (read unused) toys now in our attic are the girls’ trucks and the boy’s doll. My son’s trucks and machines of various kinds are destroyed from overuse and the girls’ dolls still exist, but are pretty shopworn.

There really are hard-wired gender differences, I’m convinced of it. Choices are one thing. One of my grandsons (the same one) likes to bake. My daughters and one of my granddaughters like to shoot.

I see nothing wrong with allowing children choices that might not be “gender-specific”, as generally thought. But I see no use whatever in trying to force or even encourage opposite gender roles on children. Something has to be said for the role of success in childhood. If a boy doesn’t have the patience or desire for needlepoint, he’ll just fail at it. If a girl doesn’t like slamming another girl to the floor in wrestling, she’ll hate it and fail at it.

Unfortunately, as in my grandson’s school, ideological notions often cause those “in charge” to try to force children into things which they hate and at which they will likely fail. There were always girls who wanted to ride and shoot, and boys who wanted to cook. I say let them find their own preferences and let “officialdom” keep out of it.

I might add that I come from a long line of working women; women who often took on “mens’ roles” occupationally. I have no desire to force all women to become June Cleaver.

 

[4elise]

I must admit that the feminist agenda is really beginning to concern me, too. As a woman, I once believed it was my duty to be feminist, until I really started researching the aims of the national feminist organizations and also became aware of their methods. Equality does not, nor should it ever, imply ‘sameness’. Men and women are NOT the same, but both have equal dignity as members of the human race, but most especially in the eyes of God. But men and women are different, physically, mentally and emotionally, and according to the Catholic teachings, men and women are different at the soul level. This is according to God’s wisdom, so that male and female see each other’s value and they can appreciate the special talents and abilities that each contribute. Traditional family life must be preserved, and the Catholic church is sounding the alarm on that front. Traditional roles may not necessarily be preserved, however, because those were more important during times when families were more focused upon survival. Of course, certain things will always be feminine roles and other things will always be masculine roles. But we need to focus more upon what the Church and sacred scripture can teach us not about roles, but about purpose and design. As Catholics, we must believe that God created with a design in mind and that His purpose is meant to be lived out in the lives of each of His children, for their good and for His glory.
Yes, notions such as gender mainstreaming can be disturbing, but I believe the most important thing for us to do is to stop looking to society to tell us what our value or purpose is. Only the Creator can reveal the purpose of His creation. We must look to the authority that Jesus has established here on earth to shepherd us, in order to not lose sight of the amazing purpose and meaning of our lives and the sexes.

I agree society should not dictate our actions, we listen as they say to a ‘higher authority’! as I have understood it - treat all (men and women) as we wish to be treated - recognize that God loves each person equally ---- But - can you explain what you mean by the above red and bold statement? Does the church say that there is a man’s soul and a woman’s soul and that they are somehow different - if they do, I’ve missed it.

 

[flyingfish]

When raising our children, my wife and I were careful to be sure our girls had trucks and other “boy toys” to play with and that my son had at least one doll. The only truly pristine (read unused) toys now in our attic are the girls’ trucks and the boy’s doll. My son’s trucks and machines of various kinds are destroyed from overuse and the girls’ dolls still exist, but are pretty shopworn.

That’s one story, there are plenty of girls in the world who are tomboys.

I see nothing wrong with allowing children choices that might not be “gender-specific”, as generally thought. But I see no use whatever in trying to force or even encourage opposite gender roles on children. Something has to be said for the role of success in childhood. If a boy doesn’t have the patience or desire for needlepoint, he’ll just fail at it. If a girl doesn’t like slamming another girl to the floor in wrestling, she’ll hate it and fail at it.

I’m sure plenty of kids also hate math and would never take it if they had the choice, but we force them to anyway because that’s part of what education is about. Maybe boys who would never take cooking of their own volition would love it once they were forced and become chefs in the future. Taking a cooking class in elementary school won’t kill anyone, and part of an education is being exposed to new subjects and ideas that you might never have otherwise considered.

But my guess is that “gender mainstreaming” is meant more to address those places in the world where there are different streams in girls’ and boys’ education. Like say some 100 years ago in the Western world women went to “finishing schools” to be taught how to be stay at home wives, rather than to real universities.

 

[whatevergirl]

*I happen to think that if we as a society keep up a particular myth or whatever about something…it suddenly becomes so. ‘Boys are good at math, girls typically aren’t.’ If we repeat these things enough, suddenly it becomes so? It becomes what we should ‘‘expect?’’ These things have nothing to do with God, but rather are just things that over time in society, people tend to believe because of trends, or whatever. I agree flyingfish…some girls are tomboys, my dd was one of them for a while…now, she is becoming more girly…but I never looked at her as going against the grain…she was who she was. I think we get too hung up on labels. If I were to follow in my Italian ancestors’ footsteps (where everything was about what a woman should and shouldn’t be doing)…I’d be stirring a pot of spaghetti all day, waiting for my husband to give me the next command, and they’re probably rolling over in their graves that I got an education (as a woman) and have a good job. God bless my dad’s family, but I knew even as a little girl, I wasn’t going to build my family life on such oppression. Not all Italian families are like this, I know…but, mine was. I loved my relatives, most have passed away now…but, growing up, I remember how horrible it was for these women, they had no rights in the family simply because they were women.

Again, thank goodness for society’s desire to evolve from labels, and gender ‘‘conditioning.’’ *

 

[Ridgerunner]

That’s one story, there are plenty of girls in the world who are tomboys.

I’m sure plenty of kids also hate math and would never take it if they had the choice, but we force them to anyway because that’s part of what education is about. Maybe boys who would never take cooking of their own volition would love it once they were forced and become chefs in the future. Taking a cooking class in elementary school won’t kill anyone, and part of an education is being exposed to new subjects and ideas that you might never have otherwise considered.

But my guess is that “gender mainstreaming” is meant more to address those places in the world where there are different streams in girls’ and boys’ education. Like say some 100 years ago in the Western world women went to “finishing schools” to be taught how to be stay at home wives, rather than to real universities.

This isn’t about 100 years ago, or in Yemen. It’s about right here and right now.

Of course some children don’t like math. I hated it, and I hated it precisely because I was not good at it. But math, at least on a basic level, is necessary to functioning in society. Embroidery, for example, isn’t, and there is no legitimate purpose in forcing boys to engage in it if they hate it. I was drawn to things other than math in school; things which, fortunately, happened to also have application in school. At a point, I was no longer forced to take math, and I could concentrate on those things I could do well and enjoyed doing. But for that, I would have hated every minute of my entire education and would surely have dropped out at a point if math was continually forced on me.

Personally, I don’t think cooking has any place in school anyway. I didn’t think it back when virtually every girl took Home Ec, and I don’t now. There is plenty of time in life, and plenty of opportunities at home, to learn how to cook if one wants to learn how to do it. School should be about academic subjects; the ones necessary to pursuing one’s occupation and, hopefully, something of the wisdom of the ages. In my opinion, that’s just as true of girls as it is of boys. Yes, there are male chefs; a good number of them. It’s not too hard to see men cooking, and if a boy or man is drawn to it, he can pursue it. That doesn’t mean every boy should be forced to do it if he doesn’t want to do it, and certainly not in school.

Plenty of “tomboys” in my family, as well as women who worked at “male occupations”. Nobody keeps a tomboy from being a tomboy, and nobody excludes women from occupations previously thought of as “male occupations”. It’s just silly and unrealistic to think anyone does.

My problem is not with working women or tomboys or boys learning to cook if they want to. My problem is with the state,which has the power of coercion, thinking somehow it has a place forcing children into engaging in roles generally favored by the opposite gender, just to force them to do it, and for that very reason. Frankly, I doubt very much that you would insist that all girls wrestle. Almost none do so notwithstanding the fact that virtually all have the opportunity if they want it, at least around here. How many girls have you ever seen who learn to box? There simply are gender differences, and most of them are due to the fact that girls and boys do not think the same ways.

It’s pretty well accepted now that the educational system is failing boys badly. Boys have interests, generally speaking, that are different from those of girls, and levels of development that are different. Because the educational powers that be are ideologically dedicated to absolutely leveling gender differences, the system now favors girls’ usual developmental course over that of boys. That shouldn’t be, and we’re paying a price for it in terms of failure rates.

 

[flyingfish]

Personally, I don’t think cooking has any place in school anyway. I didn’t think it back when virtually every girl took Home Ec, and I don’t now. There is plenty of time in life, and plenty of opportunities at home, to learn how to cook if one wants to learn how to do it. School should be about academic subjects; the ones necessary to pursuing one’s occupation and, hopefully, something of the wisdom of the ages. In my opinion, that’s just as true of girls as it is of boys.

I haven’t thought about it all that much. I guess in later years it would make sense to make school purely about academics, but not everyone is cut out for academics and I still think school should teach people basic life skills.

Maybe there needs to be a mandatory class or two on cooking and food considering how fat Westerners are getting, and how kids are eating things that can only loosely be called food.

Frankly, I doubt very much that you would insist that all girls wrestle. Almost none do so notwithstanding the fact that virtually all have the opportunity if they want it, at least around here. How many girls have you ever seen who learn to box? There simply are gender differences, and most of them are due to the fact that girls and boys do not think the same ways.

I don’t know, if I remember right I did about 9-10 grades of forced gym class. I don’t think we had wrestling, but we had basketball, volleyball and the like. Considering how unhealthy people have gotten, maybe an hour a day of forced gym class, whether its wrestling or basketball is a good idea.

It’s pretty well accepted now that the educational system is failing boys badly. Boys have interests, generally speaking, that are different from those of girls, and levels of development that are different. Because the educational powers that be are ideologically dedicated to absolutely leveling gender differences, the system now favors girls’ usual developmental course over that of boys. That shouldn’t be, and we’re paying a price for it in terms of failure rates.

I’ve heard people say that, but has the way kids are taught really changed that much? Teachers have generally always been women, and schools have generally always required kids to sit still and listen.

 

[rayne89]

When raising our children, my wife and I were careful to be sure our girls had trucks and other “boy toys” to play with and that my son had at least one doll. The only truly pristine (read unused) toys now in our attic are the girls’ trucks and the boy’s doll.

Hey that brings back memories. I had a large collection of match box cars as a kid. I also had lots of dolls. I was the second of two girls in the family and closer to my dad. I think I showed interest in some boys toys because I felt my dad missed out on having a son -not that he ever said or did anything to indicate that. I still have all my cars and passed them on to my daughter. My husband has a couple cars that survived his childhood. I definitely played differently with them then he did. Sure I had a race track that I raced them on but I separated my cars into pairs that had similar body styles. The two vans, the two VW bugs, the two suburbans, the two drag racers, two pick up trucks ect -they were each a couple and I named the cars (I can still remember most of the names). I kept them two by two in one of those hardware caddies with all those small drawers and when I had out grown them I wrapped them individually in tissue and packed them in a box for when I had children. They were my beloved cars and I didn’t dare tie firecrackers to them and blow them up or play smash up derby with them. I was a girl and I played with my cars differently then the boys because girls are different .

Oh and as far as cooking, most professional chefs are men. It’s actually quite hard for a woman to get into that field. I have a female friend who is a chef and the men don’t like a woman in their kitchen. You have to be an aggressive, tough woman to make it as a professional chef.

 

[Joseph_L_Varga]

Hallelujah! Although it comes a little too late for me, I’m all for gender mainstreaming! I had a very difficult life, growing up with an older sister, and later on being the only guy in a class of 20, at the school of pharmacy, so I could have used any help I could get! But unfortunately gender mainstreaming wasn’t available during my time. It is, however, good to know that help is available for poor guys who find themselves in a similar dire situation today!

For example, here’s one of my early childhood experiences that scarred my soul for a long time: an aunt who visited us from abroad, brought us a nice box of beads, with several compartments holding beads of various types, sizes, and colors. You could use these beads to make necklaces according to your own inspiration, and it was really a marvellous gift to us. With the help of the grownups, we separated the piles of beads on a 50-50 basis, half for my sister and half for me. My sister immediately started making necklaces, and a few days later, she used up her portion of beads. My whole stock of beads was still there, practically untouched. Then, my sister came to me and suggested that we separate again my portion of beads into two halves, one for me and one for her. I felt this offer was unfair, because it would leave me with only one quarter of the initial amount of beads, and my sister would get three quarters. I didn’t want to comply with this request, but my sister kept nagging me, and finally I gave in, basically in order that she would leave me alone. So, after giving half of my portion to her, I thought she would leave me alone. But it turned out I was too naive. By this time, my sister was way faster as a beader, and she run out almost immediately of this smaller quantity. Thus, she came suggesting that we share again the small amount of beads I still had, on a 50-50 basis. Now, that really made me annoyed, and I told her I was not going to give her any more beads! I was young (maybe 6 y.o.), but I realized this was already profoundly unfair! And I thought, this was my last word, case closed! I was wrong again. My sister started to crrryyyy! So here, what could I do with a girl who wanted something profoundly unfair, and yet she was the one crying when she didn’t get it? I had to make her somehow stop crying… I gave her the beads… Finally, she used them all.

Or, take this one: we always used to fight, and my sister always used to beat me, until I became approximately 10 years old (my sister is two and a half years older than me). However, at that point, I became stronger than my sister, in spite of the age difference, and I could beat her. From that point on, our fights magically ceased, and we had a very good relationship with each other ever since. It makes me wonder sometimes, though, is it that my sister was in fact the culprit for picking fights while she was stronger than me, and later on she wisely learned not to pick fights anymore, when I became the stronger one?

And due to traumatic experiences such as these, I welcome gender equality or gender mainstreaming or whatever it’s being called! Let’s teach the boys that it’s PAYBACK TIME once they become the stronger party, and they should beat the … out of their sisters, without ever feeling bad about it! I figured out that much! But, somebody please help me out, what do you do as a guy, with a crying girl who wants ALL your beads?? :banghead:

 

[chevalier]

But, somebody please help me out, what do you do as a guy, with a crying girl who wants ALL your beads?? :banghead:

Starts with a hug but I’m not sure it doesn’t end with a lecture. Seriously, though, your example made me wonder if sometimes it isn’t like women test you and if they can beat you, then you aren’t their leader. I hope it’s not true because while I can play a willpower contest, I just don’t want to be rated weak by the same people whose wishes I’m granting.

Again, thank goodness for society’s desire to evolve from labels, and gender ‘‘conditioning.’’

Yup, but it often seems that along with the old ways’ vices, we gave up a lot of what was good in them. Then again, there’s the nostalgic attachment to the old times that always makes us gloss over what was bad, so it’s easy to exaggerate about how things are supposedly going worse. One of the bad things of the current times is the lamentable way in which men treat women these days and in which women accept poor treatment from men and/or look for men they can push over. I’d blame it on a lack of proper male formation, but a lack of proper female formation seems to be a necessary co-cause because it’s not like we can say it’s all because men are failing (unless it is).

 

[flyingfish]

Starts with a hug but I’m not sure it doesn’t end with a lecture. Seriously, though, your example made me wonder if sometimes it isn’t like women test you and if they can beat you, then you aren’t their leader. I hope it’s not true because while I can play a willpower contest, I just don’t want to be rated weak by the same people whose wishes I’m granting.

Maybe some really, really twisted drama queens do this. I actually read an article a while back in Scientific American Mind about drama queens. I don’t remember it now, but it was something about their weird brain chemistry.

 

[chevalier]

Maybe some really, really twisted drama queens do this. I actually read an article a while back in Scientific American Mind about drama queens. I don’t remember it now, but it was something about their weird brain chemistry.

:tiphat: to your choice of reading. Well, it does seem interesting what kind of hormones would come to the forefront in such a setup and how different that were from how the figurative normal brain works. I generally always feel weird in a situation where it’s a woman’s position vs mine because it feels like a no-win situation for me. I suck it up, smile and concede… I’ll get friended as a weak guy she budged. I put my point across, I don’t feel comfortable with myself or with her appreciation of that fact (well, unless it’s something obviously to her good and/or her initial refusal was sheer stubbornness, then yeah, I appreciate being appreciated for pushing it through then). Reminds of the situation where you’re paying for a date. Some women will test you. The one will drop you if you allow her to pay despite her offer, the other might well drop you for forcing it on her (just illustration, the issue itself is trivial).

 

[flyingfish]

:tiphat: to your choice of reading. Well, it does seem interesting what kind of hormones would come to the forefront in such a setup and how different that were from how the figurative normal brain works. I generally always feel weird in a situation where it’s a woman’s position vs mine because it feels like a no-win situation for me. I suck it up, smile and concede… I’ll get friended as a weak guy she budged. I put my point across, I don’t feel comfortable with myself or with her appreciation of that fact (well, unless it’s something obviously to her good and/or her initial refusal was sheer stubbornness, then yeah, I appreciate being appreciated for pushing it through then). Reminds of the situation where you’re paying for a date. Some women will test you. The one will drop you if you allow her to pay despite her offer, the other might well drop you for forcing it on her (just illustration, the issue itself is trivial).

These kinds of stories make me wonder if I have Asperger’s. In all my interaction with guys, my biggest manipulations have been finding ways to tell the creepy ones to get lost without outright telling them to get lost.

 

[chevalier]

These kinds of stories make me wonder if I have Asperger’s. In all my interaction with guys, my biggest manipulations have been finding ways to tell the creepy ones to get lost without outright telling them to get lost.

Makes me wonder if I haven’t been the creepy one with my could-have-beens,