Monday, October 17, 2011

A short Facebook conversation (on gender)

Sheria: I find the interchanges among you gentlemen fascinating and quite interesting.

Edge: How so?

S: I like the directness of your interchanges. Women tend to skirt around issues on which they disagree or have differing points of view. It can make direct conversation awkward. I generally prefer the way that men communicate with each other.

E: But men get confrontational too quickly. Women have mastered judicious restraint, probably for survival reasons, physical abuse directed at women, etc.

S: Judicious restraint is a good thing but avoidance of confrontation is also problematic. I spoke with a good friend today and a male member of a board to which she belongs has been a pain in the ass for over a year. He finally told the female chair of the board, "Fuck you," and resigned from the board. There's a board event coming up soon and the chair decided that he should still be invited for to the event because she wanted to show that there are no hard feelings. He accepted the invitation. My response would have been, "You wish and let the door hit you on the way out."

E: I'm with you on your assessment re: your friend... There was a bit on the radio today about women 'making it' in politics. There was a reference to Question Period in the parliamentary system, which favours the testosterone exchanges rather than a more nuanced and conciliatory approach that a woman might take. I found that interesting. And on the other hand, I find it fascinating how women are drawn to men who have power...

S: I find that the more female approach works more effectively in interpersonal relationships but a bit of testosterone helps in business and politics. I think that both genders could learn a bit from each other.

E: That's the truth. Mix is good in all ways. Modern men, unfortunately, are not trained to handle male-only environments and that poses a great problem for communication. Modern men will suck up after women and then behave like women (or a parody thereof) when dealing with each other.

S: I think that perhaps both genders are still stuck in patterns of behavior that were necessary in earlier eras. Powerful men were better protectors when survival was a daily battle and therefore more attractive to women who needed a mate who could protect the home and provide security for the family. Women who were dependent and submissive were more attractive to the alpha male who needed home to be a place of peace and comfort to balance out the struggles of the outside world.

E: Well, if you go by the grocery store checkout magazine racks, those patterns are sure enduring!

S: As we've modernized and created more and more creature comforts, those patterns are no longer necessary but the genetic imprinting is still there in our psyche.

E: Deep imprinting. The game of dominance vs. the game of cooperation. How do we get it to work? I'm still reading this Equality book by Wilkinson and Pickett. Great stuff. Cooperation and equality produce a finer, gentler life experience every time. And yet...

S: Cooperation and equality aren't highly valued traits outside of interpersonal relationships. The women's movement emphasized equality but that equality was defined as being allowed to play in the male arena rather than amending the rules of that arena to more reflect and respect female styles of interaction. As a woman, to be successful in previously male dominated arenas such as business or politics one must learn to play by male patterned rules.

E: These traits should be among the most highly valued. As evidence, the disenfranchised American male is now in deep emotional crisis...or so the research says. W&P point to humiliation and shame as a real problem to male in unequal societies. Incarceration rates in the US tell only some of that horrible story... That point about male patterned roles was the topic of the radio show. More forward thinking women were opposed to that approach, and rightly so, I think.

S: I agree fully. The big issue is how to effect that type of change when the attitudes and beliefs continue to be passed from generation to generation.

E: Well the concept of women adopting male roles to survive and thrive in business is still relatively new. A lot of women haven't reached that stage yet at all. But I do agree, there is a strong intergenerational transference.

S: I agree, a lot of women haven't reached that stage. First you have to recognize that there are different rules and then you have to figure out how to incorporate them into your own style without going too far and risking being labeled a bitch. It's a tightrope.

E: What women don't know is that it's just as hard or harder for most men. A lot of men just aren't that dominant. Small men have a big handicap in the power game, and the physical size of CEOs shows it. The most successful women whom I've met in business are either very well put together (intimidatingly clean-cut and good looking) or tall and even large and imposing. One needs to threaten a male to maintain power it seems. Ancient patterns...

S: I believe you. A lot of the posturing that I see among men has to do with insecurities. I recall reading a few studies that put forth the belief that taller men are more likely to be in positions of power. I think that there is a lot of pressure on men to fulfill idealized notions of masculinity, just as women are expected to fit certain notions of femininity. Too many stereotypical notions of gender identity equals way too much stress.

E: I think all of society has, at the moment, a heightened sensitivity to power, although it's not yet being openly discussed... And I agree with you on the personal level. As a male I've dealt with these power issues all my life. I remember moving to new schools (4 in 8 years) and having to fight the toughest kid in every class—even though I wasn't either confrontational or big and tough (I was on the small side).

S: That's a lot of new schools in a short period of time. I was a quiet child, terribly shy, so I avoided confrontation for the most part. I just disappeared. It wasn't until I went to college that I found my voice. Great conversation as always, perhaps if we were allowed to be in charge of the world we could resolve these issues. I have a couple of things to do online and then it's bed time for me. Good night, Jerry.

E: Night Sheria. A pleasure as always. Much warmth.

20 comments:

  1. Ah yes, men, those sensitive souls:

    "Welllll, is this a dagger which I see before me, pilgrim?" (John Wayne's "Macbeth").

    "I'm sick and tired of looking at this mother-***** dagger in this mother-****** hand!" (Samuel L. Jackson's "Macbeth")

    "Is this dagger talking to me? Well, I'm the only one here!" (Robert de Niro's "Macbeth")

    ReplyDelete
  2. LOL! My favorite is Samuel L. Jackson's Macbeth. I actually watched Snakes On A Plane! Dino, you've made me laugh almost as much as that movie did.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ah, with today's crew I might be able to get Laurence Fishburne or Morgan Freeman or even George Cluney with the Mac. But Matt Damon, Brad Pitt or Will Smith, not so much.

    Is there a female Shakespearian version? Which character?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sheria,

    Yes, I think SLJ should get on that -- we need some new Macbeth portrayals.

    Edge,

    Well, I'm not sure, but I've seen some great Lady Macbeths -- Judi Dench and Francesca Annis come to mind. Macbeth has drawn some fine actors -- Ian McKellen, Orson Welles, Patrick Stewart, Jon Finch....

    Julie Taymor is a fascinating contemporary director -- her production "Titus" is remarkable, and a new version of "The Tempest" is coming out soon with Helen Mirren starring as "Prospera." Should be interesting....

    ReplyDelete
  5. I was thinking that Kate from Taming of the Shrew might offer some good parody material (but haven't had time to check for a good quote...). Helen Mirren in Prospera would be interesting, will have to watch for that.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Lady Macbeth is one of my favorite Shakespearean women. She is especially interesting for her efforts to reject what she perceives to be the weakness of her gender.

    Come, you spirits
    That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here,
    And fill me from the crown to the toe top-full
    Of direst cruelty!


    And when Macbeth wavers, questioning whether the murder of Duncan is the right course of action, Lady M uses perhaps one of the most disturbing images of infanticide to make her point that Mac better carry out their plan:
    I have given suck, and know
    How tender 'tis to love the babe that milks me:
    I would, while it was smiling in my face,
    Have pluck'd my nipple from his boneless gums,
    And dash'd the brains out, had I so sworn as you
    Have done to this.


    She shocks Macbeth who tells her:
    Bring forth men-children only;
    For thy undaunted mettle should compose
    Nothing but males.


    It is interesting how often in literature women are portrayed as the instigator of wickedness or at the least, the downfall of a man. It's not the sensitive female characters that are most well remembered. Our fascination centers on characters such as Lady M; Desdemona's (Othello)lines are not nearly so readily recalled or quoted as Lady M. In Gone With The Wind it is Scarlett whom we can't ignore and sweet principled Melanie fades into the background.

    On television dramas, the female characters that have leading roles are not the sweet sensitive types. Perhaps the biggest gender myth is that women are sensitive and that sensitivity is appreciated as a desirable quality.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Yes, Lady Macbeth is one of my favorites, too – her “unsex me” prayer to the spirits is remarkable. Once the deed is done, she and Mr. Mac take very different paths, and she is punished with all the ferocity meted out to transgressive women like Clytemnestra in classical tragedy: unwomaned and unmanned alike, exposed to dread and scorn. The Greeks admired a strong female, but they tended to kill her off for trying to “be a man.” And then there’s Nikolai Leskov’s “Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk,” but that’s a whole nuther Lady Macbeth….

    I like Jane Austen’s Regency ladies, Anne Elliott from Persuasion in particular – as far as I’m concerned, Jane Austen belongs right up there with Shakespeare and Milton as one of the Englit gods.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Sheria,

    In the interests of critical accuracy, I should amend that SLJ Macbeth to

    "Enough is enough! I have had it with these m-f daggers in this m-f hand!"

    ReplyDelete
  9. Kinda liked this: "Perhaps the biggest gender myth is that women are sensitive and that sensitivity is appreciated as a desirable quality."

    A parallel assumption could be made about the male power stereotype laid out in the Mac-SLJ scenarios. What is it about these gender caricatures?

    Sure, there is the evolutionary 'survival strategy' explanation. But it occurs to me that, buried deep inside, is a craving for unconditional love. Freud alluded to that in the form of infantile desire. But that hardly covers it. And perhaps we humans of either gender strive for that unconditionality no matter how impossible, but pursuing different (or opposite) means to securing that end, women seeking unconditional protection from powerful men, men seeking unconditional attention from sensitive/sensual women. Hence the lasting importance of the stereotypes...

    ReplyDelete
  10. Edge,

    From what I can gather, the tendency for men is to define themselves (and be defined) by proximity to or readiness for violence. It seems obligatory for them to do that, and it's unfortunate. Humans!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Dino, you must be one of those above-it-all vegan types. Carnivorous lizards get right into it, regardless of gender, or so I've heard...

    ReplyDelete
  12. as far as I’m concerned, Jane Austen belongs right up there with Shakespeare and Milton as one of the Englit gods. Totally agree Dino. I'm a major Jane Austen fan.

    Her female characters are quite complex. They chafe against the conventions of their time, wanting love but uncomfortable with the posturing and pretend fragility called for as evidence of their feminine worth. In Austen's world, the dilemma is resolved by the opportune discovery and eventual meeting of the minds with a man who is not really cut from the same fabric as his contemporaries and appreciates the woman's uniqueness.

    I think that Austen would perhaps agree with Edge's observation about the desire for unconditional love. Her female protagonists wish to be accepted as creatures of both heart and mind, to be able to display their wit and intelligence without fear that it will frighten away any suitors. The males in her works al have flaws centered around a rigid pride a hubris that prevents them from revealing that they, too, desire unconditional love. Of course, because it is a world of her invention, these needy souls eventually reveal their true selves to one another, find the acceptance that each desires, and presumably live happily ever after.

    Dino, I don't discount your observation that men define themselves or are defined by their proximity to or readiness for violence. However I think that this is just a manifestation of the desire for unconditional love. It's not the violence itself that's desired, it's demonstrating his worthiness to the female that's of significance. In the a wider animal kingdom, the male of a species often courts the female with displays of prowess, including attacking other males as they are all potential rivals for the female. Men are truly peacocks, putting on a magnificent display to woo the peahen.

    I always end up thinking of gender roles as reflecting archetypal patterns and survival strategies. There is a primal need to bond and each gender brings a subset of needs to be met to solidify that bond. A powerful man willing to engage in physical exploits to win and keep the woman was a plus when survival was dependent on the ability to secure your safety against others who would take it by force. I think that our subconscious still retains those patterns of male and female behavior.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I find it interesting that men are having as much trouble trying to resolve gender issues as we women do.
    I agree with the assessments that our ancestors operated under much stricter survival codes which supported strong male roles and submissive female ones. Times have changed and we no longer need that model but we still find ourselves entangled in it.
    I like this as the money quote, "but that equality was defined as being allowed to play in the male arena..."
    That is why the field is still not level - we all play by the rules of men. Women are ever gaining ground but it is a steep hill we must climb.
    And this is not to say that the problem lies squarely on the shoulders of men for while there are an abundance of gender biased males, there are a plethora of women who insist on remaining in the submissive victimized role even going so far as to undermine other, more ambitious women in order to protect their lifestyle.
    As long as we are having these thoughtful conversations, I'd say we should also have great hope that gender equality is an attianable goal.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "It's not the violence itself that's desired, it's demonstrating his worthiness to the female that's of significance."

    Sheria,

    That's an interesting thought, but how does it explain the persistent misogyny of male-centered cultures at least since the ancient Greeks? There's a strain of contempt for females that I don't think we can account for with a theory that says men seek women's unconditional love -- it's starkly evident in classical western cultures, where friendship between men was considered one of the highest values.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Dino,

    That certainly leads into deep waters... Platonic love, gay love (and the unanswered emotional desires in those orientations), the origins and historical development of matriarchies and patriarchies (Jared Diamond might help there). Wow. Where to begin?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Dino,I think that perhaps the misogyny evolves from fear. Men desire unconditional love but they fear that their need for such is a a sign of weakness. They view their need as a flaw to be hidden because to reveal their neediness is to show weakness and vulnerability. They fear that women have some mysterious power to make men need them and they resent the powerlessness that this makes them feel. They project archetypal patterns on women as seductress, as siren, as Circe, bewitcher of men.

    While they desire the companionship and comfort of the feminine, they also experience a state of confusion and wariness as they fear that the female has the power to strip them of the masculinity which they have worked so hard to project in order to attract her. They find the company of other men less complex because the rules are clear--power and strength are desirable qualities and he who most successfully wields his power is the superior man.

    It's a theory.:)

    ReplyDelete
  17. So many distractions, so little time, I am finally getting around to sharing notes for a post that never got posted, one that was tentatively titled:

    Why Women Should Rule the World

    Why? Because men have made a complete hash of civilization since the beginning of time – domination, cruelty, war, tyranny, and oppression. Apparently, some Very Smart Brothas agree:

    Four reasons why women should rule the world:
    1. there’s more of them where it counts
    2. they live long as hell
    3. they have a much, much, much, much greater tolerance for pain
    4. they have special powers


    Leave the frat brothas to their fun, it’s time to get serious. In her book of the same title, Dee Dee Myers has interviewed prominent women in politics for their views, a brief sample:

    Dee Dee Myers: “That's not to say that women in elective office focus only, or even mostly, on so-called women's issues. But research confirms that both Republican and Democratic women are more likely than their male counterparts to initiate and fight for bills that champion social justice, protect the environment, advocate for families, and promote nonviolent conflict resolution. They also focus on issues like transportation, agriculture, and arms control, just like men. But women, as Geraldine Ferraro once said, "raise issues that others overlook, pass bills that others oppose, invest in projects that others dismiss, and seek to end abuses that others ignore."

    Kay Bailey Hutchison: “There were four Democratic women and me, for a total of five who were elected that year. And we did get together to do several things that were definitely a result of our experience as women. We changed the laws regarding rape victims in Texas and became really the leader in the nation on fair treatment for rape victims. And we did that as a coalition. We did equal credit rights for women. We did historical preservation. I also did transportation . . . And it was a great coalition that we had because the Republicans knew that if I was on it, it was okay. And the Democratic women had the credibility with the Democrats. So when we went together, we just mowed over them."

    Kathleen Sebelius: “ People bring their own life experiences, and women's life experiences are different than men's — not better, not worse, different. And 51, 52 percent of the population is women. And so having people at the table who make decisions based on their life experiences, their lens — whether it's as a mother, a daughter, a spouse, somebody who's in the workplace — I think we get better policies, a better dynamic."

    Wangari Maathai was the first African woman awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace. She founded the Greenbelt Movement, an organization dedicated to sustainable development and responsible for planting 45 million trees across Africa, providing firewood, clean drinking water, balanced diets, shelter, and income for rural families. Wangari Maathai died of cancer in the same month three more women were recognized by the Nobel Trust: Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Leymah Gbowee, and Tawakul Karman.

    For a change, maybe it is time for men to step aside and have women run the world.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Sheria,

    And a fine theory it is. I'll have to defer to you humans -- what do I know? I'm a big foolish reptile?

    Octo,

    Yes, I think human females would do a great job -- though it WOULD get in the way of the great transfiguration even now being planned by the Revolutionary Dinosaur Liberation Front, wherein the dinosaurs lead their cousins the reptiles and the birds to victory over the human beings who have trashed our planet.

    ReplyDelete
  19. All,
    I think you must search far and wide to find one creature whose male of the species is more cooperative and supportive of their female and feminist counterparts. Below the waves in the realm of the octopus, there is one such creature: The venerable
    Hippocampus.

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil discourse from all people but express no obligation to allow contributors and readers to be trolled. Any comment that sinks to the level of bigotry, defamation, personal insults, off-topic rants, and profanity will be deleted without notice.