Gender or human being?

[Catnip]

There's something that's been on my mind a lot lately. It's actually been bothering me.

It's the thought that men and women act differently. Honestly, I've began to question that.

In a thread in another forum, completely different website, the users and myself were discussing 'getting the belt' by our parents (I've always lived with my father, so of course for me, it was my father only). It was a silly thread and I made a comment on how hilarious I thought it was to get the belt.
Someone (we'll call him user1) replied to my comment, saying that what I claimed was "bullshit" because getting any sort of physical discipline from a father only shaped the mind of his son, since apparently girls can never be affected the same way. I know for a fact that his reply was untrue. I look back and remember how funny my older brother and I thought it was. We used to compare on who got it worse and just laugh about it the entire time. However, I have spoken to many girls about physical discipline and most of their opinions on it reminded me of what user1 had said to me. These girls definitely weren't affected the same way myself, or indeed a boy would be. They were angry, sad, 'scarred', anything that would be categorized as dramatic from a slight smack.

I think I'm rambling, but I'll try to make this as short as I can. I'm not sure how to articulate my thoughts exactly, but I'm trying here.

Anyway, I think men and women can act the same. I'm not saying a woman can naturally act like a man and vice versa, I'm saying we can act as equal human beings. I think logically like my father (not with my emotions like some would claim a typical woman would do) and respond or react to certain things very similarly to how my brother would. It comes natural. I don't try to be this way, this is me.

Though, on television, we definitely see differently. We can look at a girl and think to ourselves "girl". We can look at a boy and think to ourselves "boy". We (I think it's safe to speak for most everyone?) don't normally look at a character on television and see a person. We see a gender.

I definitely didn't get all of my thoughts out there, but I would like for you all to comment on this and allow me to express my full opinions through replies. I have tons of examples to back up my poor ways of writing down my thoughts, so I think I'm ready for yours.

What do you think about this, FFF?

 

[ClaireSensei]

yes every human being should be treated equal, and should have the equal rights to become what they wont to be.

However first lets start with culture, okay a test that was done first they took a group of females and gave them a math test before they did they made sure that they thought that he ave of female scores on it was low,and guess what the ave of their scores on it was low. Then they took the same group of females gave them the same test however worded differently, this time they push into their brain the thought that on this area of what they be doing the ave of female scores on it have always been high. guess what the score of that group of females was high.

thousands of test like this have been done. All came to the same thing culture,religion,ideals we are told. affect how we act what we do and how well we do it. So you see by the time a child is 6 they have already been push to act and be a certain way and this is more true for females, females get much more pressure in this area. Which is one of the reason thing like aspergers it seem males have it more then females, which is not true it just how culture force a female to act. Since females have to be more social creatures then males have to be.
A male will like trucks robots and such a female will like pink and barbie. why because are culture says so and thats it.

Of course their is some change and some loop holes in this. depending on your enviroment and well the second reason i will be talking all about it in a few sec.


well know to talk about the brain.
know the basics are the same however some chemicals and wiring of the brain is differnt. Like if some one get to many Y are to many X when they are being made.
Then a male body can be born the outer shell that is. while the brain, certain chemicals will be present that should only be witha female and this can go with a female body and a male brain. any way this person this guy will act like a girl and will be gay no madder what you do. Why even through is goes againt cultore well the reason is. That things have been on pretty much the sam way so long that are brains have change ev and so on to fit to what we suppose to act like to what culture says we soppose to act like.
Well i try not to go deep into anything and try to make it very easy to understand so i did not name any thing are explain any thing to deeply.

sorry for my bad eng i am really bad at eng

 

[Catnip]

A male will like trucks robots and such a female will like pink and barbie. why because are culture says so and thats it.

This is very interesting to me. Since on a walk one day, I thought about how things as simple as toys can easily divide a gender.
Why can't boys play with Barbies? Why can't they pretend with a couple of dolls?

Because it's for girls, right? That would be someone's only reply. Which, in my mind, is absolutely absurd.

I suppose the only thing stopping most boys to play with dolls/'girl' toys is due to the risk of appearing homosexual, which belongs in another topic.

 

[West]

Since females have to be more social creatures then males have to be.

This is interesting; I would've guessed that if one gender were expected to be more of a social creature than the other that it'd be the other way around. After all, considering the traditional stereotypes, the women stay home and raise the children/do housework while the men go out into society and do whatever it is that they do. Anyway, I suppose this particular point is neither here nor there.

Why can't boys play with Barbies? Why can't they pretend with a couple of dolls?

Because it's for girls, right? That would be someone's only reply. Which, in my mind, is absolutely absurd.

Rationally speaking, it is absurd. But there is certainly a social stigma present when boys play with barbies and girls play with trucks. It may also have something to do with levels of testosterone present in the individual. "Boy" toys (like trucks, robots, etc.) generally seem to be more "powerful", and as the gender with more testosterone, I suppose it makes some degree of sense on that level, too.

As for your point of seeing gender instead of an individual, I agree and disagree at the same time. We definitely take note of gender, and it's certainly an important factor when you're trying to identify someone. I mean, think about whenever you see a stranger who you aren't certain whether it's a boy or a girl. It's practically the only thing on your mind about them, and it's a bit irritating until you figure it out.

But I don't think it's such an awful thing. It's more of a subconscious study of the person as we strive to understand and identify people with what limited information we have. We see gender so prominently because it's one of the most distinguishing physical characteristics of a person, outside of their ethnicity. We do it because we want to try to know them, and we notice things like gender most when we don't know someone on a more personal level. I'm not sure about anyone else, but I have quite a few friends who are girls that I treat the same as I treat my friends who are boys, because when you get to know someone personally, gender is less important (unless, like, you're interested in that person intimately).

I had a class on this sort of stuff back in high school, but that seems like ages ago and I remember very little of it at all. But I'll leave it there for now and perhaps come back to this thread later. I should be in bed right now.

 

[Stoic Hero]

It's interesting you bring up the whole toys business. In a study done with chimpanzees, there were male and female chimps placed in a cage with trucks, dolls, etc. Without any outside stimuli, the males migrated toward the trucks and the females to the dolls. I thought was really interesting, since it reflects our culture.

What can I say? I'm for sure not a feminist, but I'm not so much of a...masculinist? to not appreciate self respect and strength in a woman. However, I think I should say something here. Women want equality, right? Equality in everything. Do you know what equality means? No more men paying for dates, no more men pulling chairs out for you, no more men opening doors for you, etc. Also, if we're so "equal," why do you wear a bra? Why don't men have to? Or a tampon? We aren't equal physically, that's for sure. Sit and Stand to pee and all of that. Plus, I don't think we're equal emotionally. Say what you want, but it's a fact that women cry more often than men. Many blame that on our society, but honestly, I just don't feel like crying. When I feel like crying, I cry. I don't hold it in. I've never held it in...I just don't cry that often.

I don't think we're equal. That doesn't mean I think women are less by any means, but we aren't the same. Different standards, different roles, just different in general. And I think a lot of times women get prideful and want more power than they have. Men do it too, to be sure, but I'm extremely against feminism and what it stands for. Because, frankly, feminism is about women gaining power and men losing it. And that doesn't support equality anyway.

I just want a world where men can be treated like men, women can be treated like women, and both are happy and respected. Is that so bad? Is that so unnatural? I'm sick of all this equality nonsense, because we'll never be truly equal.

 

[Catnip]

When I feel like crying, I cry. I don't hold it in. I've never held it in...I just don't cry that often.

I'm the exact same way. I was never much of a crier. Many have told me that I'm 'stronger' that way, but then what does that make crying? Weak? Nope. Just don't feel like crying, that's all.

But this isn't necessarily about equal rights for women. I'm trying to get to more of the direction this was headed in:

I have quite a few friends who are girls that I treat the same as I treat my friends who are boys, because when you get to know someone personally, gender is less important (unless, like, you're interested in that person intimately).

And even though this quote contains the example of how female friends are treated, it really doesn't need to be that at all. However, I cannot say that what West has said can be switched, since for some reason, it just seems odd to me that someone would treat a male friend as they would a female friend, which I feel really stuck on. Because since I feel women can be treated as men, then what would men be treated as? Would they be left alone since women would already be up to their, I suppose I could say 'level' for lack of a better word? Would it seem okay for someone to enjoy 'girly' activities with a man (this brings us back to the toys)? Having tea parties with boys may sound odd, but let's keep this in mind:

Why can't boys play with Barbies? Why can't they pretend with a couple of dolls?

Because it's for girls, right? That would be someone's only reply. Which, in my mind, is absolutely absurd.

 

[MVP]

My personal opinion on this is there are a lot of things that shape things like this.
The environment your born in, the way you were raised, the way your siblings act and treat you, the way your parents act and treat you. The culture your raised in. How much you socialize in real life. How social you are in school when growing up. The culture you live in. In the current society we live in, its almost impossible for women to be like men, and men like women. Of course we are equal, but there are things we are not equal in. There are characterizations and many are true. There will be always things that man can do that women can do and vice versa. These characterizations will always remain in society and not allow this to be possible. After all, god purposely didn't make men and women the same.

 

[Kandy-Sugar]

[Moved to The Sleeping Forest.]

It seems more suitable here. =)

 

[CassinoChips]

I've skimmed the replies, and I see a lot of the points I would have made, so I don't know how much I'll add here, but...

There are a lot of factors that come into play in terms of gender roles and gender typology. If we consider infants to be a blank slate when they're born, then there's really nothing that says that a male infant can't act exactly the same as a female infant, and vice versa. Then, it stands to reason that a child could learn, or could be 'trained,' for lack of a better word, to act in whatever possible fashion.

Unfortunately, infants are not born a blank slate. In fact, they are hardwired to act according to gender. As has been stated, all else being equal, boys in most cases will gravitate to 'male' toys, while girls will gravitate to 'female' toys. Then, of course, societal norms come into play, and we pick up on the subtle - or not-so-subtle - differences between the genders, and treat the child differently based on what gender they are. Because that information is hardwired into us. So it's a self-perpetuating cycle.

Is it possible to break the cycle? In many ways, yes. But it takes a lot of effort. My girlfriend went to an all-women's college, and there was about a 30-35% non-heterosexual population there, so I ran across quite a few lesbians who trended more towards the 'butch' type. And their whole 'male' personality seemed to be put on; it was if they were trying so hard to repress the feminine aspects of their personality, and put forth a masculine vibe, that it just came across as over-the-top and forced.

To sum up, it's possible to act the same way, but fighting against the combined forces of nature and societal norms is a difficult road to hoe.

 

[eye of the divine]

Unfortunately, infants are not born a blank slate. In fact, they are hardwired to act according to gender. As has been stated, all else being equal, boys in most cases will gravitate to 'male' toys, while girls will gravitate to 'female' toys.

It actually starts much earlier than that if you look at the development of a male baby and a female one. A baby boy will be more curious about how things work and baby girls will be more intrested in social things like being with their mother.

However a female baby develops quicker than a male one. e.g. learns to walk etc.

I'm not saying this is in every child but most definatly the majority.

 

[West]

However, I cannot say that what West has said can be switched, since for some reason, it just seems odd to me that someone would treat a male friend as they would a female friend, which I feel really stuck on. Because since I feel women can be treated as men, then what would men be treated as? Would they be left alone since women would already be up to their, I suppose I could say 'level' for lack of a better word? Would it seem okay for someone to enjoy 'girly' activities with a man (this brings us back to the toys)?

I suppose my overall point was that I treat my female friends the same as I treat my male friends, not necessarily that I treat my female friends as though they were male friends. I just treat them the same. But I suppose that maybe I am just treating them like male friends, since I am male and that's just how I'm used to acting, or something. I guess I'm probably more gentle with female friends; for instance, if I felt like hitting one of my male friends in a joking manner, I'd probably do so without too much of a second thought. If I even did hit a female friend in such a way, it'd probably be much softer.

Anyway, I think it's possible to treat male friends the same as female friends. For instance, I had a female friend who I'd go shopping with. Well, more like I took her out shopping and then tagged along to her shopping, which happened on several occasions. The only other people she said she really did that with was her sisters and such. And I can't recall the last time a male friend of mine said, "Hey man, I really like that shirt on you. It really brings out the color of your eyes, dude."

So, yeah, there's a difference between how genders act. But I think that's just how we're programmed and raised to behave. I really don't think there's much rhyme or reason to it; I think that from birth, boys are boys and girls are girls, and being raised as such is little more than emphasizing our natural tendencies to perhaps give us a better sense of self.

 

[Catnip]

I suppose my overall point was that I treat my female friends the same as I treat my male friends, not necessarily that I treat my female friends as though they were male friends.

This is actually what I was looking for and what I meant. Sorry, I worded myself crappily.

So, yeah, there's a difference between how genders act. But I think that's just how we're programmed and raised to behave. I really don't think there's much rhyme or reason to it; I think that from birth, boys are boys and girls are girls, and being raised as such is little more than emphasizing our natural tendencies to perhaps give us a better sense of self.

This makes a lot of sense. Generally, it really is not a big deal and isn't a bad thing, but because most everyone doesn't actually notice this insight, they get caught up in boys being boys and girls being girls that it's acted as though a crime if boys were to play dress-up.

I would also like to involve relationships and love. I used to think about this a lot. I'm a 16 year old who's never actually been in a relationship, so anything I say could possibly mean nothing. Though, it could still possibly mean a lot.
Anyways, I will post.

Personally, I don't think love needs to have anything to do with lust. I don't believe you need to lust in order to love. Because if that's the case, then I want nothing to do with it.
I like to think of myself as heterosexual, but I think it's possible for me to love another woman. I definitely do think I could very well fall in love with a man some day, but my lust would only go toward the male gender. I have not and I don't think I ever could lust for a woman.
The reason I believe I could love a woman is because I think falling in love with an individual, a person, is possible. I'm not so sure gender has anything to do with it, really. But I'm talking about pure love. No lust.

Now that I've put my thoughts into words, I realize how silly it all sounds. I've never been in love, like I've already stated, but this is what I believe. It may all change, though. Someday.

Someone help me out here. My mind likes to travel a mile a minute, and because of that I end up with silly beliefs that even though I know are silly, I believe in many ways are somewhat realistic.

 

[ClaireSensei]

This is interesting; I would've guessed that if one gender were expected to be more of a social creature than the other that it'd be the other way around. After all, considering the traditional stereotypes, the women stay home and raise the children/do housework while the men go out into society and do whatever it is that they do. Anyway, I suppose this particular point is neither here nor there.

Rationally speaking, it is absurd. But there is certainly a social stigma present when boys play with barbies and girls play with trucks. It may also have something to do with levels of testosterone present in the individual. "Boy" toys (like trucks, robots, etc.) generally seem to be more "powerful", and as the gender with more testosterone, I suppose it makes some degree of sense on that level, too.

As for your point of seeing gender instead of an individual, I agree and disagree at the same time. We definitely take note of gender, and it's certainly an important factor when you're trying to identify someone. I mean, think about whenever you see a stranger who you aren't certain whether it's a boy or a girl. It's practically the only thing on your mind about them, and it's a bit irritating until you figure it out.

But I don't think it's such an awful thing. It's more of a subconscious study of the person as we strive to understand and identify people with what limited information we have. We see gender so prominently because it's one of the most distinguishing physical characteristics of a person, outside of their ethnicity. We do it because we want to try to know them, and we notice things like gender most when we don't know someone on a more personal level. I'm not sure about anyone else, but I have quite a few friends who are girls that I treat the same as I treat my friends who are boys, because when you get to know someone personally, gender is less important (unless, like, you're interested in that person intimately).

I had a class on this sort of stuff back in high school, but that seems like ages ago and I remember very little of it at all. But I'll leave it there for now and perhaps come back to this thread later. I should be in bed right now.

I'm sorry their is no if are buts to if females have to be more social are males have to be.
I give ya a brief thing about why females always had to be more social.
But i subject you actually study history and culture.

First with the more commonly known one.
A male from way back until know can sleep with multy females and not much fuss will be made about it in the past a female would be killed are out cast today still in some place while in others just outcast.

This is the same in all areas with society a female main role was not the house are the children.
It was to make the man look better to keep him looking good.
Okay at a party if a male acted out if he was married his wife would have been blame. If he was not then every one would forget in a couple of days. While a female would become a perm outcast. females always had to act perfect seem to be flawless. since unlike men who could mess up a female oen mistake in any way and their life would be ruin.
Like i already said which i explain better know female main role was to make the man pride bigger make him look better. female was a trophie that had to always say the right things act the right way nothing more then a position like a horse. As long as she did not mess up and kept making her husband look good she would have a place to live and food.
Of course their was the thing of giving birth to a son are being killed as well. Since if the wife had a child and it was a girl she at fault she get blame if it a boy then it all his doing. That was the mind set of people.
In reality it really only on the men his sperm is what decided it gender.
Uh and then theirs the thing about if the children grow up to be good humans then it was way to go to the father if they grew up bad then it was the mother fault. Are you getting the pic yet, a female had to be perfect in society are be killed are out casted which is pretty much the same thing. While a men could be a complete men slut a drunk and he be forgiving.

This is just ones of main reason why female are much more social creature then males.

forgive my eng

 

[Dragon Mage]

I'm taking a Women's and Gender Studies class at my university in addition to a Sociology class, so I've been VERY up-to-date on this issue. Forgive my long post.

While I, a well-worded feminist, totally support the idea of equality between men and women, I do not think that the only solution to this is to have universal androgyny.

For those that may not know, androgyny is a term that means appearing as both man and woman.

Note that how a 'man' looks and how a 'woman' looks is an entirely social construction. However, it is not an entirely evil construction. It may emphasize the ancient (and sexist as hell) 'masculine' image for men and the 'feminine' image for women, but it has a purpose, one that isn't meant to say "Men are strong and powerful and women are weak and small."

Consider, if you will, a world filled with androgynous people. You cannot tell if anyone is male or female because they all have shoulder-length hair-cut, clean shaven, wear baggy clothes, and all wear make-up to some degree. They carry no accessories (like purses) but all wear small, formal-designed backpacks. Everyone wears pants and sneakers. There are no 'dangle' earrings, but everyone has some kind of piercing, and tattoos are of mythical creatures or abstract shapes, like stars, spirals, etc. Only 12 animal tattoos are allowed, and those are the animals of the zodiac. Jewelry has no distinctive style other than 'glittery' or 'shiny' -- there's no elegant designs or the like.

This little image shows exactly what many people (and some of the more insane feminists IMO) claim is the only way to have a truly equal state between the sexes. Think about the price being paid to achieve this image. It has essentially drained all personality and individualism from humanity. Everyone is of ambiguous gender-appearance, so therefore no one is right or wrong for men wearing makeup or women having short hair.

But there is a very good reason why we have the differences of gender appearance the way we do today. Humans, like any other animal out there, are almost always courting the other sex. Women grow their hair long and wear jewelry and the like as a sort of 'plumage' to draw in the male, as well as to spread pheromones, the glands of which are on the back of the neck. Men, in turn, try to assert their strength and prove how good they are at defending themselves and are good mates -- this comes straight from the primal instinct of 'breeding with the ones most likely survive' in order for the offspring to survive. A woman will choose an athletic man over a sickly man, not because of looks (though it may be a factor) but because the athletic man has the traits that contribute best to survival -- and these traits are considered attractive. Note that this idea of physical fitness also applies to women; aside from the ridiculously anorexic models, nearly all female models have an athletic form and large breasts (which speaks of health and fertility). Androgyny would be an utterly unnatural thing, despite what sociologists would have you believe.



Well, now I've vented my opinion on that, I will add one short thing:

I do agree that men and women act differently, and I do believe that they do so because they are socialized to be that way. Boys are not 'boys' and girls are not 'girls' in the social sense. Every human being has the same potential, emotionally and mentally if not physically, and are merely socialized to emphasize one end of the spectrum and not the other. (The greatest difference between men and women are pattern recognition and anatomy.) Everything else is all social. Particularly brought up in the first post -- women are more 'sensitive' then men.

I see this as nothing short of brutal sexism towards men. It implies the men cannot feel, have no emotions worth worrying about, and are insensitive brutes that just want to fornicate and punch people. It is such a self-demeaning concept that I'm constantly amazed as to why men want to 'toughen' or 'man-up' their sons.

Likewise, women are socialized to be delicate, flighty things that don't really have any opinion but are there to do the housework (read: shitwork) and make babies, specifically male babies. Women are told not to worry about their careers because a man will do it for them, and they are told that to be sexual is the only way to be in life. We're all quite familiar with what this social role says and I think it's safe to say no one likes it. It is a dying image, but one slow to move in the grave.

These social roles are steadily changing, however, and we should focus less on what one sees (clothes, jewelry, tattoos, hair) in connection with a social role and focus more on the way another person acts instead. Do we see gender first? Yes. Is that gender a bad thing? It was, but the winds are changing. In a generation or two, a man will see a woman and see potential and capability, not a condom holder. A woman will see a man and see sincerity and understanding, not a brute that doesn't understand 'what she's feeling'.

Until that day comes, I will continue doing what what I have been for a decade now -- treat everyone as a human being and not a gendered, cardboard cut-out.

 

[M1ghty Mous3]

Having read only the initial post, i've come up with this.

A. Society has always demanded certain behavior from both genders, both almost nothing alike. With women bing the moms and caretakers, and fathers being the workers and fighters. While indeed society has changed over the years, these ideals still flow greatly in our thoughts. My take on this is because since society once viewed women as "weak" that many still subconciously do. Now is that to say women indeed are weak? No. I know of two very intelligent ladies, whom are actually very dear to me. While they may seem a little on the loopy sde and might exhume a bit of male edeals here and there, they indeed still have womenly traits. Hell one of them sleeps wit ha machete near here head, and the other has 3 katanasa under here bed that are battle ready. Why? Saftey. Saftey from ridicule of society for going against the norm and being them.

B. Throught man's history their have always been seperate rules governing people depending in what country they lived. What's taboo for others in not for some. They generally cannot act the same because their ideals are not. And while i'm sure they have to potential to act as others, they might not realize it. Take China for exapmle. The one child law. Would america ever put out such a law if our population got that high? Who knows. I'd like to hope for general safteis sake they would but I can never be sure. Now take canada as another example. Tey have marijuana as a free usage item. The US does not. Why is that? Honestly i couldn't tell you. But i will assume that because it's legal, thier crime rates are drastically lower then the US's. Now is this the prime reason for it? No, i highly doubt it. But it very well could be.

C. Uprising has always been a very defining experience for a human. Some with more troubled pasts then others. This also has an affect on certain ideals and wishes. Take a kid from the bronx, he might wat to become a ery intelligent man one day just to keep his family away from that place. Or the oppiosite. He might become intised by such violence and cntinue to grow in the enviornment he's presently in. Which might lead him to become a deadly fighter. Now take a kid from a rich neighborhood. Everything is handed to them. They mgith act out as a way of stirring the pot if you will. Or they might enjoy the wealth and power and grow to become a CEO of a large company. Or he might just want to live a normal life. Blending int osociety as another face so to keep his privacy.

While humans have the ability to act the same, they seldom do or acknoledge the y have the ability. Humans will never act as one another unless by force. Independence is too valuable these days.

 

[Catnip]

Very good last two posts.

I have a question to anyone. I would like to be enlightened as to why males are generally the more dominant ones in society. Is it because they are physically stronger? Do women just simply allow it? Were things this way ever since the beginning of time?

 

[ClaireSensei]

Very good last two posts.

I have a question to anyone. I would like to be enlightened as to why males are generally the more dominant ones in society. Is it because they are physically stronger? Do women just simply allow it? Were things this way ever since the beginning of time?

Yes males from the begining was the boss's why because in the past when we was still using rocks to kill are food.
Males had to be in charge, look at most other animals on the planet.
The system of males hunting and ruling and females more nothing but consider a item sadly enough had to be that way are we would have died out.
Plus like almost every single other male animal males are phy stronger the females naturaly. so a female way back when was better built for taking care of the children and getharing veg. while the males was better suited for fighting and hunting. With all premitive creatures the strongest is thought to be the best. Then was we started to adv when str was not all that any more. since males pride was so big to think a female could be equal would hurt their pride and make them look small. That why female was treated as posations and males have been domanite so far.
when every a women tried to do something great she would have been killed in the past. However because of how males thought how they believe females was nothing more then no better then a horse are a dog.
Females did have a shadow power,and if yo read history you see what i mean. Through out history females had been able to control their husbands using their husbands pride among other things. Boost their pride, make them think their all that and that these ideals are theirs and you can as a female can do a lot of great things of couse the guy will be getting all the credit however you know it and if you god enough in the future people will figure it out that you did it. Of course how their shadow power works is a lot more complacated but i'll stop know.

UH and i beat most people are either right away don't agree because of my eng are don't bother reading, and those who does think it stupid.
however even if my ideals sound stupid if you every actually just stop listening to others and study on your own as well as talk to the people who is the very highest in their fields in these areas you see i am telling the truth.


ps. again sorry for bad eng

 

[Donald Trump]

Very good last two posts.

I have a question to anyone. I would like to be enlightened as to why males are generally the more dominant ones in society. Is it because they are physically stronger? Do women just simply allow it? Were things this way ever since the beginning of time?

Historically it made sense for men to be dominant. Women couldn't really own land etc and were seen as mentally inferior and received a different sort of education to men. The latter was true even as little as 70 years ago. I don't think that's the case now though, I don't think there has been a person as dominant in recent British society as Magret Thatcher. I think it's gradual process and that more women will be in positions of power. I don't think it will ever be equal though. Both the military and the police force are both very macho jobs, for want of a better word. For a women to rise to the top of either, would I think be very unlikely due to ingrained prejudices of both institutions.
Another thing is that people are prejudiced, at some level. I don't think all men will take kindly to what they will see as being 'ruled' by a woman. Whereas women have always be subordinated by men and would have no such qualms (generally).

 

[Stoic Hero]

I would take offense of a woman ruling over me. Call me sexist, but that's just me. I don't think we're equal beings, either. That doesn't mean that I won't treat women with respect; I always open doors for women (people in general, actually. I just let women go before me) and pull chairs out for them. I try to speak sweetly and politely to women, and not cuss or act stupid around them. I don't think it's a bad thing that I feel like a man. Someone who sets example and treats women with respect. To me, that's what a man does, and I will continue to do that, regardless of what other people think. I may be sexist, but you'll never see me beat up on a woman. I want to the best for the women in my life, and I'll do whatever it takes to bring everyone happiness. I'm just working with what God gave me. I'm a male, and I do manly things. I don't think it's wrong to separate myself from women in that respect, as it's part of who I am.

Can women be strong? Yes.
Can women do hard jobs? Yes.
Can women be competent and intelligent? Yes.
Can women be men? No.

That's all I'm trying to say.

 

[West]

I'm sorry their is no if are buts to if females have to be more social are males have to be.
I give ya a brief thing about why females always had to be more social.
But i subject you actually study history and culture.

First with the more commonly known one.
A male from way back until know can sleep with multy females and not much fuss will be made about it in the past a female would be killed are out cast today still in some place while in others just outcast.

This is the same in all areas with society a female main role was not the house are the children.
It was to make the man look better to keep him looking good.

I think that there is a distinction between being a social creature and being obedient (for lack of a better term). All of the examples you gave would, to me, fall under the latter category.

The way I understand, a social creature is someone who goes out into and is seen in society regularly, engages with others in activities with people outside of their immediate family, establishes relationships with said people, etc. The role of the woman as you appear to be describing it sounds more like one of simple obedience; doing what she must according to her husband's standards. She has little to no control or freedom in her actions. And if she is a social creature, it is likely to be because her husband is. Just because she's good at putting on an act in front of others doesn't necessarily make her a social creature.

Either way, I don't want to push this thread too off-track, and I don't think that these sorts of standards or stereotypical gender roles have too much of a prominent presence in today's society--and if they do, then it is certainly becoming unpopular. I don't think there are too many parents who are still teaching their little girls to shut up and be a tool, nor are they teaching their little boys to beat up little girls. (There are, of course and unfortunately, exceptions to every rule.)