From: michael@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Michael)
Subject: Re: Gender differences - Sophie Germain
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 17:23:04 GMT

In <1560@ozz.oasis.icl.co.uk> dvp@oasis.icl.co.uk (Geezer) writes:
>michael@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Michael) writes:
>> In <92350.160218RIPBC@CUNYVM.BITNET> <RIPBC@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes:
>> >  Incidentally, I suspect that one of the reasons that men do not complain
>> >about discrimination against males is that men are brought up to feel that
>> >complaining is not masculine.  There MAY be a biological element here.
>> >I can whine and complain with the best of them, but I find it almost
>> >impossible to cry!!  Women seem to find it quite easy.  is that something
>> >in which you can be influenced?  Or is it quite natural like sneezing?
>> 
>> I feel certain that the biological influence (if any) is small.  Men
>> are culturally conditioned to what you just described.  However you
>> *can* overcome this -- I have.  It took a lot of hard work to see
>> through the illusion of what is masculine, but I've discovered that by
>> opening up my emotions and accepting them and believing in myself
>> despite my culture that I'm now stronger than I was before.  Sounds like
>> a paradox -- I can cry yet I am not weakened by it.  But its true.
>What is your opinion of the native American tribes of the past? Would
>you say that their masculinity was something to be ashamed of or would
>you perhaps say that their masculinity enabled them to survive in a
>hostile environment and was therefore a necessity, an admirable trait
>that enabled them to survive - except when the odds where too long?

I have no experience with native American tribes and cannot comment on
them unless you describe them in some more detail.  However, I do not
believe that any man should be ashamed of himself.  Shame is a negative
nonproductive emotion.  Shame is what stops us or slows us down from
growth.  Rather, if there are some aspects that most men share that
work against us such as some of what is considered masculine today,
I think that we should simply face those issues and try to work them
out.

And I have never said that all aspects of masculinity or men in general
are bad.  Some are quite wonderful.  And those should be recognized
and we should feel proud of them.  I do.

I am proud of who and what I am.  Yet despite how I feel I've come from
leaving the "norm", despite the growth I feel I've done, I still
recognize that I have more growth to do.  There is nothing shameful
in being imperfect.  That's the definition of being human.

>Why is masculinity such a dirty word these days? Excesses of

It isn't in my book.  However becoming static and not growing is a
dirty word in my book.  I don't find masculinity to be a dirty word.
Rather as I grow, I redefine it.

>masculinity, as excesses of anything, is not a good thing, but
>masculinity is, in itself, nothing to be ashamed of. Masculinity
>implies a determination not to be disheartened when things get tough,
>not to be discouraged by physical pressure, not to be dissauded when
>your chances of success seem slim. It's about showing those who may
>think otherwise, that you can't be walked on and it's not a good idea
>to try (OK, real Clint Eastwood stuff I know), but with restraint,

Not at all.  These are admirable qualities that men (AND women to I
might add share).  I don't think that anyone would try to deny these
qualities to anyone.  However I've met many "so called masculine" men
who have none of these qualities.

It sounds to me like you are feeling picked on here.  Just because
many of us find that their are qualities that many men share that
need addressing, that does not mean that men are bad.  Relax and don't
feel so defensive. :)

>without being flashy about it. It is not about seeing how many
>beers you can drink, or how fast you can drive or even how many women
>youy can make, it can be a noble and worthy thing AND, it is not a
>male preserve.

I'll agree with that. :)

>When a female exhibits masculine tendencies (kicks ass, whatever),
>she is often admired by her peers for being go-ahead, take what you want,
>person.  Men exhibiting the same tendencies are are labelled boorish,
>chauvenistic (if women are involved) etc. 

I don't recognize those as being masculine.  I recognize those as being
admirable HUMAN qualities.  When men AND women exhibit these qualities
(being agressive) in appropriate ways, I admire them.  When exhibited
inappropriately, I don't admire them.  I believe that men and women both
have the same potential to be aggressive in inappropriate ways.  However
since men have sat on the top of the totem pole in our culture for so
long, I perceive that more men are inappropriately agreesive than women.
This is not because men are inherently "bad".  Its merely a product of
our culture.  As men and women become more equal, I'm quite sure that
both men and women will be fairly equal in how they handle being
agressive (appropriate and inappropriate behavior).

>I am not ashamed of being male, I am not ashamed of (trying) to be
>masculine. I make no apologies for this.

Good.  But you might want to take a look at why you feel the need to
defend yourself so strongly.  I don't believe that anyone is attacking
you for these qualities.

>                                         I believe, in general, womens
>strengths are different to mine and that for that reason, we each NEED
>the other at the end of the day. Trite words? Simplistic? Sure, but

For now, and because of the way men and women have been trained in an
unequal culture, I agree that most men are not equal to most women at
this time.  Because of this we do indeed compliment each other well.
So I agree with you on this point as well.

>then I don't have the ability to argue, analyse and discuss issues the
>way some of you people do (and good luck to you).

I don't know.  I think you've expressed yourself very clearly.  The
goal here is not to "win" (although some think it is).  The goal is to
discuss and share our viewpoints.  In this you have succeeded quite
well I would say.

>My perception of radical feminists is that they want to remove man
>as a 'threat' or 'obstacle' and the way they hope to achieve this is
>too turn them into feminine men - make them ashamed of their
>masculinity and their male-bonding etc. Neuter them in effect.

This is one of the reasons I believe that men rally so much against
feminists.  However I do not believe that this is what feminist intend.

Certainly as many women are attacked by men they may want to strike
back.  I bet this is what you are perceiving.  But you simply have to
ignore this.  If you want to know what feminists want, Try talking to
them and asking them.  And then when they answer, look at what they
said.

As far as I can see, all the feminists on here simply want an even
chance.

Of course there was the one who wanted to form a group excluding men.
I thought that was rather ironic as she was herself discriminating.
But I feel that such hypocrites are a small part of the feminist
movement.  Keep in mind that its easier to hear the radicals.  Many
mainstream "normal" people never speak up much at all compared to the
more radical people.

>Feminists say that a woman should have the right to be a high flier
>if she wishes, or to stay at home and raise kids if that's what she
>wants. If she wants to be a hard-nosed go-getter fine. If she wants
>to have a more traditionally feminine character, also fine. I would
>ask then that they also extend that right to men.

It is.  If a man is willing to support his wife financially allowing
her to work in the home rather than in the workforce then that is
mutually agreeable.  If a woman is willing to let a man do that then
I see no problem either.  On the other hand, if they both want to work
that is good to.  I don't see that this right is NOT extended to men
in any way.

>ask then that they also extend that right to men. If a man wants to be
>a 'macho' man that should be his right and he should not be condemmened
>or ridiculed for being so.

A man can be anything he wants.  If he acts inappropriately, people
will chide him.

>Do I sound paranoid?

No, just defensive.

>                     Just another chauvanistic nutter with an axe to
>grind? Think that if you will. All I'll say is that a few years ago
>the word was that men should not put women on pedestals, now it seems
>that there's those who, in the name of feminism, are trying to place
>them on higher pedestals than they ever were before.

Not at all.  It sounds like you just don't understand what women are
really asking for.

>Why can't we have equality for all without dictating role models for
>people? None of us are perfect or will ever come close.(another
>profound statement :-) ).

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement.  And I have great news for you.
You can have this now.  You can be anything you want.  Of course no matter
what you choose to be, SOMEONE will always be on your case about it.
However, if you believe in yourself, that doesn't matter.


    Michael Stanley (michael@glia.biostr.washington.edu)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,soc.women,soc.men