Letters to the Editor
phunkjnky
Published Letters: 59 Editor's Choice: 1
-
Gender roles
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm all for broadening choices and letting kids grow up without being beaten for being perceived as "gay" or what have you, but on a slight aside, has anyone truly thought through the complete impact were gender rules to be completely deconstructed? It would seem to me that a complete deconstruction of gender roles would result in androgyny for both sexes... Huge segments of our economy depend on being able to "divide and conquer" our wants and desires. Most of us, even the most enlightened of us define ourselves subconsciously along strict lines. The very act of describing yourself sets "limits" on who you are. Freedom cannot exist without laws, else it is anarchy. While free, it comes with no protections and it doesn't work very well.
The pursuit of equality is all well and good, but for moment think about every single child being completely left to their own judgement as to what is and is not appropriate behavior for their gender... Playing with dolls or trucks, wearing pants or a skirt, these are all symptoms... Tread carefully, the end result may not be what you want it to be, liberal or conservative... I just don't see humanity ever getting to a point where the only way you can tell men and women apart is by whether or not someone has breasts, hips or facial hair (at a glance, of course). It would de-sexualize us and that just wouldn't be any fun anymore, or at least it wouldn't be nearly as interesting.
-
Competitiveness?
[Read the article: Are men more competitive?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm not really sure how this really quantified competitiveness, when the test subjects were in individual rooms. It looks good on paper, but wouldn't it have been better to have them in the same room at the same time. It's one thing to compete against an abstract, in this case what someone else tells you your competitor did, and a whole other kettle of fish to compete against someone who is in front of you. This isn't a criticism of the results, but of the methodology. I know that the fastest I ran in practice, was never as fast as I ran in a game with someone else trying to catch you, and my coaches made damn sure I knew about it. But I could swear that I ran as hard as I could in practice too. It usually takes someone else to draw that competitive fire out of you. The very best can compete against themselves with some success, but it is their competitiveness when "opponents" are involved that truly defines them.
-
Julie...
[Read the article: Are men more competitive?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Two points...
A) Austen wrote fiction...
B) Being more competitive about one thing, or a very narrow band of things, does not make up for a lack of competitiveness everywhere else... Maybe women are more competitive than men, or just as competitive as we are. However, in this culture, part of the world, etc. it by and large isn't true. Men can and do build mountains out of molehills over friendly competitions. Whether it is over women, a promotion, grades, the size of the TV, men are engaged in a constant "one up/one down" struggle. Check out Barbara Tannen's books on linguistic differences in the way men and women communicate. Whole chunks are devoted to the constant struggle for status and knowing your place in the pack. Most of the jostling for position is innocuous and can be seen in joke telling and storytelling, or spouting some of the useless knowledge we've managed to acquire. We are keenly aware of each others skill sets as they pertain to us, i.e. so and so is a better pool player than I am, but he can't tell a joke to save his life. There are women who are competitive and seek status in much the same way. However, they are greatly outnumbered by the rest of us.
-
LeCastor
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What I would be more concerned with about this slightly tongue in cheek list, is the small truths involved in each statement. Most of us know if someone affected in almost every one of those statement... Just because it doesn't apply to you, doesn't make it true...
BTW... White Privilege is a very real critique... When I was in policy debate in college, the University of Vermont ran White Privilege very successfully as a critique of current and future policy... There is nothing quite so humbling as having someone explain to you, with evidence how being white, you cannot solve anyone's problems but your own, and that you must answer for the sins of your parents, but you can never really answer for them... There are counter-arguments of course, but it is a very real school of thought in liberal academia.
-
LeCastor
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What I would be more concerned with about this slightly tongue in cheek list, is the small truths involved in each statement. Most of us know if someone affected in almost every one of those statement... Just because it doesn't apply to you, doesn't make it not true...
BTW... White Privilege is a very real critique... When I was in policy debate in college, the University of Vermont ran White Privilege very successfully as a critique of current and future policy... There is nothing quite so humbling as having someone explain to you, with evidence how being white, you cannot solve anyone's problems but your own, and that you must answer for the sins of your parents, but you can never really answer for them... There are counter-arguments of course, but it is a very real school of thought in liberal academia.
-
Good Grief
[Read the article: Can't work for them, can't sue them]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Will someone please quote for me, where rape was justified in this thread?