Letters to the Editor
-
"You seem reluctant to give a direct answer though, why do you suppose that might be?"
I said it's possible. How is that not a direct answer? What kind of response do you expect to?
It's a radically different culture that we most likely never have because it would require women to somehow assume men's roles and men to assume women's roles. I don't know how possible that is. But if i could somehow magically switch men and women, I think it is very likely that "lots of women would be lying on the couch drinking beer and watching sports while the men fluttered around them resentfully doing housework."*
What do you think, Dick?
* "and feeling too unloved to have sex"
I don't think anyone said anything about feeling unloved.
PS My boyfriend is a lot more of a neatfreak than I am, and he bitches at me to not leave dishes all around the kitchen, but it's his problem if he doesn't like it. He does the bathroom, cooking, vacuuming, and other stuff. I do the dishes, make the bed, and other stuff.
-
You did say it, sorry I didn't read very carefully.
We disagree about what is possible obviously, and while you are more straightford in your (in my opinion delusional)views than most the reality is that even though many women argue that gender is entirely socially constructed most don't really believe it when confronted with specifics. You do apparently, honest but delusional, although maybe not so delusional, after all; taking the position you do allows you to maintain intellectual consistency when you argue that all difference is constucted, and since men and women are different you will never be proved right but since no "acultural" humans will ever be available to study you can never be absolutely proven wrong either.
-
he bitches at me to not leave dishes all around the kitchen, but it's his problem if he doesn't like it
this is the crux of the matter: why can't men say that to women and not have any more problems than you do?
-
@ Dick
You did say it, sorry I didn't read very carefully.
We disagree about what is possible obviously, and while you are more straightford in your (in my opinion delusional)views than most the reality is that even though many women argue that gender is entirely socially constructed most don't really believe it when confronted with specifics. You do apparently,
And where is my evidence, you may ask? I look at myself, my family, my boyfriend, some of the women I know. I am much more aggressive than my boyfriend, much better at math, much more organized, planning the future. I tell him about his finances and explain investment vehicles. I'm going into a very male-dominated field. My boyfriend is the English major, the more emotional and (what i consider) sappy person, verbal, loves to cook, drink wine, etc. His mother and my mother are both strong-willed heads of the household who were in charge of the family completely, not just at the "hearth." Both worked throughout our childhoods. Both my grandmothers were engineers.
Most of my female friends have a ton of interests other than marriage, children and home-making. Sure, most women I know do want these things, but a sizeable minority from various countries, educational and socio-economic and religious backgrounds do not.
All this is evidence to me that women are not "all like this" or "all like Y" and having different role models than most American men and women had in their parents can make your life perceptions and your WHOLE SELF very different from the typical woman.
honest but delusional, although maybe not so delusional, after all; taking the position you do allows you to maintain intellectual consistency when you argue that all difference is constucted, and since men and women are different you will never be proved right but since no "acultural" humans will ever be available to study you can never be absolutely proven wrong either.
Actually, there are acultural humans - newborns. Sure, you can talk about how eating a lot of fish sauce vs. curry vs. foie gras can make a difference in utero, but beyond that, studies are performed on newborns, who have the least cultural influences humans can possibly have. I would love to see more research into that. Plus, if you study cross-culturally, you can see some of your stereotypes fall away.
-
@ Dick
he bitches at me to not leave dishes all around the kitchen, but it's his problem if he doesn't like it
this is the crux of the matter: why can't men say that to women and not have any more problems than you do?
-- dick dworkin
But he does the same for me, and it's my problem that he leaves his robe and coat lying around the house.
But we are certainly not the typical couple.
It has to do, I think, with how women are raised. As long as women are raised to be neat-freaky, and more "in charge of the house," and are taught more cleaning skills than men, and see how their moms nag their dads and the techniques their moms use to get what they want, these archetypes will persist. Women AND men need to actively break out of these stupid modes of interaction and raise their kids right. That's what my boyfriend's mom did with him, and i can't thank her enough for raising him to pick up after himself and not have any aversion to housework or cooking, etc.
-
there is a lot of evidence of gender differences among newborns by the way
I doubt neatness specifically is strongly biologically gendered, although sensitivity to the environment may be. There a lots of women slobs but very few women who are NOT slobs who can adapt comfortably to living with a slob the way organized men can accept disorganized women. What is CLEARLY a matter of biology is how much more easily than men that women are put off sex when things are not to their liking.
-
"What is CLEARLY a matter of biology is how much more easily than men that women are put off sex when things are not to their liking."
And your evidence for thi being innately biological rather than learned is...?
-
Since there are no SEXUALLY MATURE AND SEXUALLY ACTIVE "acultural" humans to study
I am quite confident that none of the other evidence will convince you.
-
@ Dick
You have evidence of differences in preference, in behavior, etc.
You say it's because it's innately biological. You don't really have any evidence to back that specific assertion up -- the mere existence of differences does not automatically mean that those differences are innate or biologically-based.
I say the differences are mostly learned. I don't have much evidence to support that assertion (any more than you have for your assertion) except the great weight of human history: so many differences have been claimed to be inherent, biological, etc., and yet have turned out to be purely cultural or learned.
Thus, I am inclined to express extreme skepticism to further claims of innate differences. And don't think that our current culture is somehow above or beyond its historical context and biases, the same kind that we can clearly see in past cultures or other contemporaneous cultures. Laurence Tribe used to say "it takes a very sophisticated fish to know it's wet." It takes a very sophisticated observer to know his/her own deepest biases.