Re: Liars and Stupids and Jerks, oh my! (Score: 1)
posted Friday, March 05, 2010 - 10:51 AM (#55254
In Response to Guairdean (#55233):
@ Guairdean -
-"I didn't raise either daughter to be any more "frilly" than a son."-
-"My grandsons weren't raised to be any more "rough and tumble" than a girl would have been."-
Next time you're shopping for a holiday card for one of your daughters, please take the time to compare what's marketed for the purpose vs. what's marketed for giving to a son.
Or, see what happens when you give your grandson a Barbie for his birthday. And, if you wouldn't, then tell me why.
My point wasn't about parental impacts. It was about society's impacts.
@ spzeidler -
-"-Especially- if these theories then lead to claims that women are naturally evil greedy money vampires... "-
This is exactly why I stated that it was easier to exemplify the negatives rather than the positives. You've missed my point entirely.
It's not about blood-suckers on real suckers. It's about a person attempting to derive meaning from their own perceptions of the outside world as the world presents itself. And for a man (Yes, man. Typical, stereotypical, and in the spirit of the original comment Guairdean made about men and women not necessarily understanding each other. -"I must disagree. Women understand why another woman needs (not wants, needs) 40 pair of shoes. Men understand why men need (again, need, not want) a complete set of nearly identical tools. Little girls understand the joy of twirling in a skirt, and little boys understand the joy of being able to jump up and touch the top of the door frame. All of these things are a mystery to the other gender. The trick is to understand that the mystery itself is also important, and to enjoy it. You are correct that we can never truly walk a mile in another's shoes since we are individual beings, but we can understand the "why" of our own genders needs. Understanding the "why" of the complementary (opposite is, in far too many ways, the wrong term) gender is something only a rare few will accomplish."-) he looks for usefulness and existing value. A woman, as (op-)pressed out by society's general marketing and entertainment trends, looks to see what value she can derive from an existing (insert noun here).
It isn't about good-natured vs. maliciousness, as these (and other intrinsic) traits exist in all people to varying degrees. As Guairdean does point out, when one examines groups separated by distinguishing traits, you begin to ven diagram everything else about them. Not everything is going to come out even, or the effort to compare would never be called for.
And, my theoretical model is discussing how I think that men tend towards pursuit, while women tend towards utility.
Or, more harshly put, in my poor attempt at dark humor (sorry any confusion) based on the stereotypes of conversational fraternization --> Men Covet, Women Criticize.
I'm not attempting to vilify anyone.