0167 - "Spring Break Sucks" [04/5/07]

[Lurker]

KWICHERBICHIN'

So far in this thread you have called me a "slut" and Lurker's "bitch". Allow me to clarify for you. I am neither a "slut", nor am I Lurker's "bitch". Lurker and I are friends. Period. I hope this satisfies your very strange curiosity about me.

ETA: I think Lurker would find this offensive also.

Yeah, I have to say I do. It was inappropriate and rather disrespectful to us both, but especially Juli.

If you were confused or curious enough about it enough to feel like getting involved in it, there were certainly better ways to go about it than that.

but their very tone seemed to indicate the belligerence and forcefulness normally associated with the male stereotype.

Are you trying to say I'm a man? o_O I am a GIRL!

I think what my brother was so heavy handedly trying to say was that there is absolutely a spectrum within a given sex.

That's actually a fairly ironic example of what we're talking about here.

The study showed that generally the corpus collosum (sp?) was narrower in men than in women. There was speculation that the effect of this was that men thought serially, working one side of the brain and then the other; while women thought cooperatively, using both sides of the brain simultaneously.....

LURKER This is the kind of biological basis for psychology I was talking about!

I assumed that to be the case. In any event, please see my response to mincartaugh about all that. While it's possibly the kind of thing that might lead to differences, there's really no certainty that there is even a difference to be found there, as the studies conflict with one another and one arguably suggests that things balance out. It's something that will probably take years yet to determine - if it ever will be.

LURKER I still do not see how you are saying there are more differences among men than between men and women. Let's say there ARE more differences... are the differences important, pertinent, or having an impact on society in general? Are the differences such that someone would WANT or feel a need to study them as much as gender studies?

The differences are quite possibly the very ones so commonly associated with males and females in the first place - there's certainly a spectrum of masculinity/feminity, agression/tenderness, and other extremes that males and females are traditionally assumed to occupy the opposite ends of. The reality of it, though, is that it's a spectrum with a great many of both sexes occupying the points between the extremes, and they commonly cross over into the "other sex's domain."

By the way, gender and sex aren't the same thing. Sex is biological (male or female) and gender is psychological/social (masculine or feminine). They don't correlate.

[longlostposter]

You were the one who brought in the topic of sluts and whores.

I said that someone else in another thread called me that. Does that give you the right to jump on the band wagon?

YOu seem to have a very cynical attitude about relationships. You know, it is possible for males and females to be friends without the female being the male's "bitch". Perhaps you should think about that.

[kwicherbichen]

The differences are quite possibly the very ones so commonly associated with males and females in the first place - there's certainly a spectrum of masculinity/feminity, agression/tenderness, and other extremes that males and females are traditionally assumed to occupy the opposite ends of. The reality of it, though, is that it's a spectrum with a great many of both sexes occupying the points between the extremes, and they commonly cross over into the "other sex's domain."

You still don't answer the question.

We all know that there is a spectrum. Each person is different and nobody ever says "ALL women" or "ALL men" "do such and such"...

Does that give you the right to jump on the band wagon?

Longlost, it's called taking a joke...
Lurker, is she always this uptight?

That's actually a fairly ironic example of what we're talking about here.

We're not talking about stereotypes, we're talking about psychology.

[Lurker]

Does that give you the right to jump on the band wagon?

Longlost, it's called taking a joke...
Lurker, is she always this uptight?

It was a bad joke. Also, you should direct your questions about her to her given the nature of that joke.

You still don't answer the question.

I feel that I answered it. If they're the very differences so commonly associated with every male and every female, then the differences would be every bit as important as those differences are commonly regarded as - if not more important given that it would be clarifying a stereotype that pervades so many levels of society.

Generally, I'd say that undermining a stereotype is actually more important than the previous value of the stereotype itself.

In summary: Yes, I think it's quite important.

That's actually a fairly ironic example of what we're talking about here.

We're not talking about stereotypes, we're talking about psychology.

More accurately, we're talking about psychological stereotypes.

[JustAnotherLonelyGirl.]

Alright, I've studied psychology and this particular branch of it pretty extensively. I haven't the time to read through every single post, but it appears the conflict underlying this debate is nature vs. nurture.

Evidence from both perspectives can be pretty convincing, but often biased. After all my research thus far, I have concluded that the two combine to develop personality and character. However, I will admit that I have been surprised at how much genetic and neuropsychological research has revealed about the origins of personality.

The roles of men and women have changed drastically over time as well as stayed fairly constant in other aspects. Women are instinctively nurturing, they are biologically preset to carry and care for children. Men instinctively look for women who will produce and care for children well. Women look for men who will provide security and protect children. Heavy women were often, in the past, seen positively because wide hips generally deliver babies easily, and, well it makes sense when you think about it (not gonna get into details). Overweightness has in recent decades become a mark of poor health - which would not prove well for childbearing. You could argue this is behind the shift in ideals.

Most men - if you ask them - don't find it attractive when a woman is TOO thin. Men still like their curves - I don't see that changing any time soon. In fact, the ideal woman has changed more in the eyes of females than males. Women are far more critical of the female body than men are.

Also, according to my psychological studies, males are predetermined to initiate sexual activity. This may contribute to the stereotype of men being horny pigs, to put it nicely.

Studies prove that there ARE significant differences in statistics between males and females regarding mental illnesses, theoretical opinions, the traits for which they search in a partner, the traits they aspire to be, the goals they pursue, the characteristics they exhibit, etc. I don't feel like searching for evidence, but I wouldn't pull stuff like this out of my butt. lol.

Whether this is due to environment, society, or biology is up for debate. But I find it is probably a combination of all three. But it is generally accepted among the scientific community that personality differences between genders have biological basis; the left side of the brain is more active, and often larger, in one sex than in the other (same with the right side). But I do agree that the way an individual is treated widens the spectrum of traits. However, personality is primarily hereditory, according to the research I've done. This adds to the nature perspective - that rather than becoming "manly" or "feminine" because of upbringing, a degree of each was predetermined by genes.

I would also like to add that many stereotypes can be attributed to physical differences. Women being overemotional - they experience more drastic fluctuations in hormones on a daily basis. I will also add, for shits and giggles, that men have a period each month in which their hormones rise, creating higher emotional vulnerability and, essentially, the equivalent of PMS - to a lesser degree of course.

Gender stereotypes haven't been erased from society. Even in the U.S., though many Americans dismiss it as a thing of the past. How many people view Hillary Clinton as a sweet, cute, attractive woman? How many people view Hilary Duff as a strong diplomatic figure?
Think about it.

[kwicherbichen]

It was a bad joke. Also, you should direct your questions about her to her given the nature of that joke.

If you got the joke, you'd understand addressing the question to you is a continuation of the joke. Still uptight.

Studies prove that there ARE significant differences in statistics between males and females regarding mental illnesses, theoretical opinions, the traits for which they search in a partner, the traits they aspire to be, the goals they pursue, the characteristics they exhibit, etc. I don't feel like searching for evidence, but I wouldn't pull stuff like this out of my butt. lol.

I think this is more important than what you were talking about, Lurker. You were just saying how there is a spectrum which is something we already understand. You don't say how its important to study people the way you're proposing.

Gender stereotypes are still here, but I am not INTERESTED in discussing stereotypes. I don't know who is the one who brought it up!
(I find my crush to be sweet, cute and attractive. That isn't a gender stereotype. That's plain old attraction. Anyway, let's stop talking about stereotypes and stick with the psychology and the separation of sex in psychology which is what I was asking Lurker about in the first place. Discussion of stereotypes is absolutey useless.)

[Lurker]

It was a bad joke. Also, you should direct your questions about her to her given the nature of that joke.

If you got the joke, you'd understand addressing the question to you is a continuation of the joke. Still uptight.

Let's move away from the joke. That's not getting us anywhere we need or want to go.

Studies prove that there ARE significant differences in statistics between males and females regarding mental illnesses, theoretical opinions, the traits for which they search in a partner, the traits they aspire to be, the goals they pursue, the characteristics they exhibit, etc. I don't feel like searching for evidence, but I wouldn't pull stuff like this out of my butt. lol.

I think this is more important than what you were talking about, Lurker. You were just saying how there is a spectrum which is something we already understand. You don't say how its important to study people the way you're proposing.

So, kwicherbichen, is what you're trying to say here that you think whether the differences exist is more important than whether they're inherent?

While some of the differences Loretta mentions do exist, the causes for them - as she said - are in question. Whether them being inherent or imparted is more important than whether they exist is not something I'm particularly concerned with deciding at the moment (though I think answering that question has obvious implications on their development in future males and females). I've just been concerned with whether they're inherent, and only that.

Certainly there are many differences that can be ingrained, and are accepted as the way things are supposed to be. In truth, psychologists do generally agree that environmental factors can ultimately prove more important than biological ones (they also generally agree that most of us are still largely a product of both our nature and our environments, though). Nonetheless, the reason it's so important not to lose that biological consideration is that it allows us to question generalizations at the most fundamental level.

This is especially true when we find things that seemingly conflict with what socialization would suggest is the proper order of things - in the case of differences in male/female behavior, the two populations as a whole nonetheless manage to come out almost the same on a number of behavioral characteristics despite socialization.

Gender stereotypes are still here, but I am not INTERESTED in discussing stereotypes. I don't know who is the one who brought it up!

It was Bree, actually.

[kwicherbichen]

How did she bring up a STEREOTYPE? She was explaining an actual STUDY.

[kwicherbichen]

LURKER

[Lurker]

Sorry. I forgot about this.

I felt like she was bringing up a stereotype because she was using umbrella categorization (even when she knew Jonas didn't fit the bill) and not qualifying how she meant it. She didn't try to explain that a combination of biological and sociological factors are believed, in accordance with "such and such study," to produce "such and such effect" in a general selection. Given how enlightenment is not exactly promoted on this kind of topic to begin with and misconceptions run rampant already, I felt it was ridiculus of Bree to not make the attempt at actually providing a context.

[longlostposter]

LURKER

Why caps?

[kwicherbichen]

Why caps? To express that I am yelling at Lurker... What's it to you?

Okay, I don't know what you are talking about. All she said is that women react to stress differently...

[longlostposter]

Why caps? To express that I am yelling at Lurker... What's it to you?

OK, KWICHERBICHEN. I DON'T KNOW WHAT FORUMS OR CHATS YOU HAVE PREVIOUSLY BEEN EXPOSED TO, BUT WE DO NOT DO THIS SORT OF THING HERE.

PERHAPS YOU WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE IN YAHOO CHAT.

[Lurker]

Why caps? To express that I am yelling at Lurker... What's it to you?

Honestly, I'm not a fan of all caps either. They're rather frustrating to look at. It's up to you what you use, of course, but I think this and this is a more aesthetically pleasing way of indicating emphasis.

Okay, I don't know what you are talking about. All she said is that women react to stress differently...

This goes back as far as "Men Are From Mars" (though it was far more annoying in that case). The reason I'm saying that it's kind of dealing in stereotypes is because those ideas she's been promoting are stereotypes, and the context of how she means it (I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt that she's not saying these are biological predispositions) needs to be explained. She needs to qualify what she's saying.

I think I already phrased why I feel that way as good as I'm likely to a few posts above, so I'll go ahead leave it here.

Anyway, that's my beef with her when she talks about this sort of thing.

[consideration]

Why caps? To express that I am yelling at Lurker... What's it to you?

OK, KWICHERBICHEN. I DON'T KNOW WHAT FORUMS OR CHATS YOU HAVE PREVIOUSLY BEEN EXPOSED TO, BUT WE DO NOT DO THIS SORT OF THING HERE.

PERHAPS YOU WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE IN YAHOO CHAT.