"the very voice that could save us by bringing balance to our world is not welcome at the table"

[omega minimo]

Our society sees the feminine as extraneous at best, and dangerous at worst. Our decisions as individuals, families, and as a nation are based on what we call survival needs: what we deem to be real, practical, and necessary for physical existence, like efficiency and defense. While no one can question the centrality of survival, this value system, heavily weighted toward the masculine, neglects the things that make life worth living, like beauty, graciousness, compassion, and relatedness. The very things that hold the world together are relegated to the status of luxuries. Art and music get eliminated from our schools. There is no time in our busy lives for volunteering, family dinners, or musical evenings around the piano, no time for friends or community festivals. Instead, we have millions of sleepless, cranky women spending their lives in the fast lane and running on adrenaline, which women are not wired to do. One day they walk into a meeting or a presentation and melt down. Their hearts start pounding. They can't speak. They lose their voice.

<snip>

It takes the realization of disappointment to create the impetus to change. Lucy Stone knew that. A lot of successful, powerful, beautiful women are disappointed. They are not just disappointed in their male-assigned sex roles; they are disappointed in their lives. They are disappointed in the limitations of a society that was, and still is, for the most part, organized around men and masculine values as essential, and women and feminine values as "other," as Simone de Beauvoir observed so long ago. They are disappointed that the very voice that could save us by bringing balance to our world is not welcome at the table.




Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/w-hunter-roberts/reclaiming-femininity_b_325845.html?view=print

[niyad]

1. so sad, so very true. k and r

[opihimoimoi]

2. KnR...its them male domination groups suppressing women/employees, and students.

[saltpoint]

3. This smacks of victim horseshit.

I see nothing stopping Amelia Earhart from flying an airplane. I see nothing stopping Georgia O'Keeffe from painting magnificent flowers and landscapes. I see nothing holding Joan Didion back from being arguably our best living writer. I see nothing stopping Harriet Tubman from conducting the Underground Railroad in the face of bigotry and hatred. I see nothing stopping the anonymous woman who trained to be a nurse and is at this hour working to help others in a hospital or medical center or nursing home in Hays, Kansas or Omaha or Dayton or Hartford.

Roughly half of all babies are girls, roughly half boys.

That's how it works.

[DavidDvorkin]

5. Boys are dropping out of school because

schools are increasingly oriented towards girls and are hostile to boys. Numerically, women increasingly dominate colleges and universities.

It's worse than victim horseshit. It's similar to Christians claiming to be persecuted.

[saltpoint]

7. Good Christ, someone here agrees with me? I hardly know what to do.

I do feel that the sentiment expressed by the writer in the linked piece is victimhood in high form.

It is a kind of shrieking, Me-only victimhood, too, based on sex/gender.

It wouldn't hurt, IMO, for the pseudo-feminist victims to get off their cans once in awhile and go do something.

[DavidDvorkin]

13. You're not alone, but

I suspect that a lot of DUers who feel the same way have learned not to express such opinions here.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[amandabeech]

92. You do realize that you are sounding like a victim yourself, don't you?

Adios!

[saltpoint]

109. Would love to hear your take on the OP's now-deleted responses in

this section of the thread.

I think that would be pretty entertaining.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[katandmoon]

19. Cry me a fucking river. Men are still and always will be the power group.

[saltpoint]

21. No, no, no. You can't add adjectives to "Cry Me a River." There's only

so many beats to the bar and the slang adjective 'fucking' adds two jarring extra eighth notes.

No can do.

[anonymous171]

47. Yeah, fuck men. They don't deserve education. nt

[Hannah Bell]

112. Bullshit. "Men" as a class aren't a "power group". In case you didn't know, for example,

men are losing their jobs in this recession at a higher rate than women.

Stupid kneejerk faux "feminism".

[Kalyke]

56. Schools aren't hostile to boys.

Schools are adapting to the changes that include not (as posted in another thread) catcalling women or treating them like inferiors. If that's being "hostile" to boys, then maybe "boys" better grow up and realize they're not the domineering species. We shouldn't have a domineering species between male and female - it's partnerships that count.

We still need science and math - genres many males excel in (whether by nature or nurture - they still perform better than females in those subjects in most studies).

FWIW, I don't agree with a lot of what was posted in the OP. I don't consider my career "being assigned a male gender role." I do agree that most Americans, in general, are cranky and stressed. Why wouldn't we be? We don't get the vacation and sick leave and health care our European and Asian counterparts do - but that has nothing to do with gender.

[liberal_at_heart]

75. so instead of bringing the boys up to the girls level

Instead of figuring out how to improve the school environment for boys we should just dump on the improvments that girls have made in school? We should be proud that girls are doing so good in school. If boys are struggling then we need to learn how to address those issues but not to the detriment of the girls education. Plus we still have areas where girls still need to improve. Girls are still taught that math and science are too difficult for them. They are taught they should just stick to things like the liberal arts. Liberal arts are fine for those who want to go into them. But for girls such as my daughter who want to go into the sciences they should be encouraged to do so. My daughter struggled with math. But we worked with her and encouraged her. Now she says it is her favorite subject. If boys need a little more physical activity to help their concentration then there should be more of that added to the classroom. In my children's school, they switch activities every 20 minutes so that the kids don't get bored and zone out. In one of my daughter's classes, when the teacher notices the kids are zoning out she has them stand up and jump around, wiggle their arms, or get in a cheering contest with the next classroom. There are things we can do help both boys and girls succeed in school.

[omega minimo]

6. You don't see it. They sure as Hell did.

[saltpoint]

9. Harriet Tubman sure as hell did, and she got it done without all the

victimhood squawking you do on this site.

[omega minimo]

10. Harriet Tubman literally followed her dreams

and would have had no time for a vicious hater like you.

[saltpoint]

12. I'd do what I could for Harriet Tubman.

While you remain locked into your victimhood and squawking.

Harriet Tubman was the real deal.

[Occulus]

88. So was Marie Curie.

And Carolyn Porco.

And Jane Goodall.

And Christa McAuliffe.

And Debra Fischer.

And Hypatia of Alexandria.

And and etc., and etc., ad infinitum...............

[omega minimo]

90. as were a lot of women named

Anonymous.

And and etc., and etc., ad infinitum...............

[Occulus]

98. So you're willing to dismiss examples of woman who have accomplished extraordinary things

by anyone's standards?

Nice.

No person was ever actually named Anonymous; there are plenty of people of both genders who have accomplished amazing things in silence. Nobody is disputing any of that. My point was to identify a few accomplished women, professionals and intellectuals, who have somehow influenced society, in an attempt to point out legitimate and strong female role models.

What, exactly, is your point with your response?

[omega minimo]

101. That's a bizarre and false projection.

If you don't know the reference to "Anonymous was a woman," you may not know your history as well as you think you do.

[SoCalDem]

111. and Ann Ecdotal

A LOT of "what's wrong" with school kids might be related to stress in the family and the failing family structure.

Too many kids do not SEE a functioning family, do not feel worth much, since they are schlepped back and forth to sitters, activities, etc, and may just feel that their own parents do not spend much time with them..Maybe the kids don't know how to manage their stress...

Now add teachers who are required to do a LOT more than teach, and how they are worried about their own jobs if those kids don't toe the line & pass those damned tests..

school must be a pretty tense place to be these days:(

[saltpoint]

102. Seems like a whole buncha them girls all thru the history thing got

a lot done.

More power to 'em.

- - -

I hope many U.S. families will take their young folks to see the Amelia Earhart film due for release in I think a week or so. I don't think it would hurt middle schoolers one bit to see a film about an absolutely amazing woman.

[katandmoon]

22. She is an inspiring example. Now tell us all about all the OTHER slave women.

[saltpoint]

23. As I understood the tale, Harriet Tubman rose to lead all slaves, whether

male or female, to freedom as an impulse and will toward that freedom, as a bone-deep and resolved will toward personhood.

I heard no shrieks from Harriet Tubman in any account.

[katandmoon]

24. No, I said tell us about all the OTHER slave women. I know about Harriet Tubman.

[saltpoint]

26. See if you can follow a few basic facts.

Harriet Tubman wished to lead slaves OF BOTH GENDERS to freedom.

Give it all the time you need, katandmoon. Take a week if necessary.

Brave soul acting on principle without regard to gender.

It's a tough concept, but goddammit, I have faith in you.

[katandmoon]

57. Stop trying to change the subject.Tell me about the OTHER slave women.

The women she did NOT lead to freedom in the hundreds of years that slavery existed. What happened to them?

[saltpoint]

103. Well, what do you THINK happened to them? The rest of us should not have

to hold your hand through this topic, katandmoon. Tubman's impulse to principle should answer that question for you in an extremely comprehensive way.

[Hannah Bell]

113. and the slave MEN.

"At a time when America has elected its first black president, more African-American men are losing jobs than at any time since World War II.

No group has been hit harder by the downturn. Employment among black men has fallen 7.8 percent since November of 2007, according to a report by the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University in Boston.

The trend is intimately tied to education, the report’s authors say. Black women – who are twice as likely as black men to go to college – have faced no net job losses. By contrast, black men are disproportionately employed in those blue-collar jobs that have been most highly affected – think third shifts at rural manufacturing plants."

http://features.csmonitor.com/economyrebuild/2009/03/15/job-losses-hit-black-men-hardest/

[niyad]

31. I suppose these women are screaming fake victimhood, too?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6813790

[saltpoint]

38. Anyone who is victimized and who is suffering is victimized and is

suffering.

I'm afraid I don't see that the argument is based on gender. Both females and males suffer in the real world.

Let us oppose that suffering without regard to gender or sex.

[woo me with science]

105. There are brave women in many countries fighting for their rights.

Such a stark contrast to the faux victimhood that is so often cultivated here.

[hfojvt]

32. what you write smacks of blame the victim

Slavery is not the problem, in your view, all of the slaves who didn't have the guts of Harriet Tubman are the problem. If somebody were to write about the evils of slavery, you would just hold Harriet Tubman up as an example. See? Slavery is no big deal, it didn't stop Harriet Tubman, did it?

"Quit yer focking whining and pull yourself up by your bootstraps."

That seems to be your message.

[saltpoint]

39. Try not to besmirch the nobility of Harriet Tubman.

I kinda like her.

Ya know what I'm sayin"?

She was brave and tough and then some.

And she led both men and women into freedom.

[hfojvt]

44. it seems to me that you are the one besmirching her

by turning her into some kind of real life Horatio Alger story to use against all the other slaves.

[saltpoint]

52. I'm trying to recall any assaults mounted by Tubman against the slave

population of the South, or anywhere else for that matter, and have yet to stumble across any.

If you know of some, kindly post for the rest of us.

[omega minimo]

59. The detractors sound like Limbaugh

[saltpoint]

118. To honor Tubman's model is to acknowledge what she knew about

those whose names would never become famous.

If you miss that point you miss the entire landscape.

[niyad]

33. or these women

http://www.womensenews.org/story/cheers-and-jeers/091009/four-win-nobel-prizes-guinea-protestors-raped

[niyad]

34. or these

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=229x11915

[niyad]

37. or these

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=229x11917

[saltpoint]

40. You might avoid the grocery lists and try some actual food preparation

instead.

[niyad]

41. oh, you are soooo cute, just like the person here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6811129

give it up, sweetcheeks. been dealing with people like you since the earth's crust cooled. seen it all, heard it all, there is NOTHING original or even upsetting about your diatribes. go drink your coffee--and do try to clean up after yourself.

[saltpoint]

42. Seriously, if I wanted to participate in those threads, I would. Turns out,

I'm in this one.

And you don't seem to have much to offer in the way of reasoned analysis.

You like feminism? You for it? You think us boys are monstrous and war-like?

So seriously and seriously upon the dust, what thoughts do you have on the notion that women are in fact victims -- "THE VERY VOICE" who can save us all?

I'd call that shriek journalism. I'd call it victimhood.

We got us a teeny little planet here, roughly half girls and half boys. I value folks who can work together better than the histrionic author the OP dragged in here by link.

[niyad]

45. you can call it whatever you want, sweetcheeks. we know your routine,

it is as old as patriarchy itself, and just as original. interesting, though, that you have nothing to say about those other people--maybe because they disprove your whining nonsense about "victimhood".

[saltpoint]

46. Ah, but it's not my article, is it. And I didn't drag it over here from

somewhere else and pretend it was a legitimate assessment of human character, as the OP has attempted yet again.

Harriet Tubman's triumph speaks for itself in any case, the principle of freedom being the point as opposed to whether a male or female is its beneficiary.

[rvablue]

68. OMG! Unbelievable.

Are you seriously arguing that woman have been unimpeded in society, careers, etc.

Seriously? :eyes:

[niyad]

4. thank you so much for posting this. right on cue, I see, the detractors step in.

[saltpoint]

11. Unrecommended. "Male-assigned sex roles" ? Jesus. I dare you to go up

to someone like Laurie Anderson and try your whiney fit on "male-assigned sex roles" on her.

[Greyhound]

16. That certainly didn't take long...

:kick: & R

[niyad]

17. just once, wouldn't you love to see something original from the detractors. have been

seeing that same kind of response for. . .how many eons now?

[omega minimo]

18. It's an interesting piece, for anyone who wants to actually read it.

:hi:

[niyad]

20. it was indeed--and I have been busy spreading it around for people I know will be interested.

[SharonAnn]

27. I actually read it and agree with you. And the detractors? The H--LL with them.

They're a dime a dozen.

[proteus_lives]

51. I read it too and it's crap.

Victim fetish, "poor oppressed me" essays like this are a dime a dozen on the net.

[omega minimo]

54. Maybe you'd be better off reading some history. Broaden your perspective and

reconsider your petty description.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Electric Monk]

25. I find your choice of avatar (Popeye with a can of spinach) confusing

based on your posts that I've seen here.

Is it meant ironically?

Maybe or or or or any of a dozen or more others from the available options would work better for you.


Oh, and itbl.

[omega minimo]

29. I find it confusing

after your despicable behavior toward me, that you think I would have anything to say to you.

[Electric Monk]

49. I find you confused

You were hostile to me before I was hostile to you, philogynist.

[omega minimo]

61. We may both think the other was. The difference being

you want to stay stuck in that state. Silly.

[leftstreet]

71. I had to look that up. 'philogynist'

from wiki:

Philogyny is fondness towards women, love or admiration for them.<1><2> It is the antonym of misogyny.

Cicero reports the word could be used in Greek philosophy to denote being overly fond of women, which was considered a disease along with misogyny.<3><4>


I thought you were accusing the poster of stamp-collecting.
:popcorn:

[saltpoint]

28. Mediation, not victimhood, is the prevalent component in self-hood and

the river of inspiration in the archetypal feminine.

Nor Hall goes further back into the subconscious realm and insists that mediation is the "distinguishing characteristic" in selfhood, and delineates it as (and here she quotes Duncan):

"...the Mother with the whispering
feathered wings. Memory,
the great speckled bird who broods over the
nest of souls..."

In the archetypal feminine it is not Neil Armstrong's foot which walks the moon; it is the glow of the moon as the foot becomes emblem of distance. Thus it is neither a male nor female foot but a glow and distance far older than any human foot.

Someone age 6 dreaming of the moon's distant craters is the one walking on its surface. Not Neil Armstrong.

[omega minimo]

30. Good night, saltpoint. Sleep tight.

[saltpoint]

35. We make strong coffee at our house.

And we invite Demeter into our kitchen at her slightest whim.

And Hekate as well, who is so close to us as spirit-cousin.

"Men are (Hekate's) brothers as women are her sisters," Nor Hall observes. "She wants no man as husband but will join with them in the hunt and feast at the same table.

Even the usually-clueless Saul got it right in his letters in signing on to gender equality in the realm of spirit, writing that there is neither male nor female, but all are one in the Christ. I don't land on "the Christ" as Saul did, but in any case, he appeared to be shooting for the spiritual zones in this one passage. Nobody ever said Saul was a good shot.

In the pre-Raphaelite depiction by Waterhouse of Narcissus, the danger is always in imagining that Narcissus is staring at himself in the stream. But of course, it is a stream, and streams flow, and their surface ripples. It is the long depth of the stream toward its bottom he is regarding, correspondent to the distance the stream has come to pass him in that very spot that very moment, and also the corresponding depth of his own being.

Not ego, but its dissolution.

[TK421]

36. I opt for the life-ending meteor I'm so sick of this fucking planet

so PLEASE METEOR.....get here fast!!!!!!

[Angry Dragon]

43. What a bunch of .....

[proteus_lives]

50. She's talking about a mid-life crisis. They aren't limited to women.

Male-assigned sex roles? :eyes:

This women got everything they wanted and it's still not enough? Cry me a river. Lots of men freak-out in their 40s/50s too. It's called a mid-life crisis. Making mountains out of molehills.

[omega minimo]

53. I hope those who are interested will read the whole piece and interpret it as they will

I still don't understand the need of some here to project their hatred and misinterpretations onto others, drag their abusives attitudes around the board and try to shut down honest discussion, open minded consideration of a piece of writing.

I don't understand their inability to read it with an open mind, think about, give others the opportunity to discuss it, without all their hatefulness being triggered in a knee jerk manner.

It speaks of some deep insecurity or complete dishonesty about being respectful and/or progressive. Reading words on a page or screen gives something to think about. Why do some automatically reduce it to something to fight about?



Reclaiming Femininity
WHAT'S YOUR REACTION?

In education, in marriage, in religion, in everything, disappointment is the lot of women. It shall be the business of my life to deepen this disappointment in every woman's heart until she bows down to it no longer." --- Lucy Stone, American Suffragist 1855


According to Gallop pollster, Marcus Buckingham, after more than a hundred and fifty years, Ms. Stone got her wish. Women are deeply disappointed, and I say it's about time.

Having worked as a counselor and coach with hundreds of women since the early 1980's, I've had a bird's eye view of the human pain and confusion reflected in Mr. Buckingham's statistics. Many of my clients are the envied women who "have it all"---nice husband, kids, big job, lovely home. Most are physically attractive, too. Yet somewhere between the ages of forty and fifty, these women show up in my office with panic attacks or total burnout. Are these privileged women just ungrateful? Or has something gone terribly wrong?

I would not prescribe socially ordained sex roles as remedy for their unhappiness. Nor would my clients want to return to the television version of the 1950's and vacuum in their pearls and high heels. I remember those years. Women were isolated. They were afraid to do anything on their own, having been told for so long that they were inferior and generally incapable. Professional opportunities were scarce. Wife beating and rape were commonplace, and no one talked about either one, except to whisper that some women liked it. You couldn't leave a bad marriage because divorce was a stigma, and life without a husband was the social and economic kiss of death. You couldn't even go into a restaurant on your own! When a woman aspired to do something outside the norm, like become a scientist or a concert pianist, she was swiftly put in her place with the label "unfeminine."

So femininity became the enemy of self-actualization. If femininity meant having to give up power and autonomy, feminists said, they didn't want any part of it. Out it went, along with goo-ball bread, pin curls, and doilies. They threw out biological explanations along with it for good measure, since those, too, were used to justify confining women to a supine position. I remember people asking, "Don't you think there may be real, natural differences between men and women?" and answering, "There may be. But we can't know what they are for so long as we continue to buy into the stereotypes. We have to strip everything away and see what emerges." So women made one of the bravest ontological moves ever made by any people in the history of human liberation movements. We threw out all our definitions of masculine and feminine, and stepped into the void.

If femininity was just a social convention designed to keep women submissive, we reasoned, then underneath we must be like men. That was where all the social and economic power lay. So we cultivated assertiveness. We invited men out on dates, tried casual sex, climbed the corporate ladder. We competed like men, swore like men, fucked like men, and tried to think like men. We asserted we were whole people, transcending gender, which of course meant we were masculine, since that was the agreed-upon norm for human being.





<More at link>



----------------------------------------------------------------------------

W. Hunter Roberts (M.S.W., M. Div.) is a counselor and coach using video conferencing to help women and men unlock the secrets of their souls. She has published widely about women's psychology and spirituality.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

55. Wahhhhhhh Wahhhhhhh Wahhhhhhh Wahhhhhhhh.

Someone give that chick a hanky...

[omega minimo]

58. Oh you poor thing.

Do your sons a favor and grow up.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

69. Wahhhhhhhhh Wahhhhhhhhhhh Wahhhhhhhhhhh Wahhhhhhhh

Boooooooo hooooooo hooooooooooo!!!!! Booooooooo hoooooooo hooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!

Can't imagine why that whining little thing is all bitter and depressed...

Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[omega minimo]

74. Can you imagine why one would feel sorry for you?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

78. Not Sure. Lemme Write Some Long Winded Whining Ass Tripe About Being Poor Wittle Me On The Internet

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[omega minimo]

83. Which account will you use?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

85. Yours.

[Dreamer Tatum]

60. Unrec for simple fact that our most senior diplomat is a woman nt

[omega minimo]

62. Ah, Harriet Tubman logic.

:think:



And you may think "the voice" means "a voice" and "the feminine" means "a woman."

[Dreamer Tatum]

64. I don't deal in platitudes, just reality

and your OP is filled to the brim with platitudes. We have an excellent start with HRC as the
highest level diplomat in the free world. Accept it or don't.

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[omega minimo]

80. Male reality

where you don't have to think or consider or respect ideas and realities you consider "platitudes" -- yet still need to put down.

[bvar22]

95. HIllary ?

She certainly out-war mongered the men, and wore pants during the campaign.

And some assholes complain about gender assigned identity roles.

I don't think you really understand what the OP was all about.

[TwilightGardener]

63. What a load of hooey.

She seems to imply that art, music, beauty, compassion--and the appreciation thereof--are all essentially feminine virtues. Bullshit. Some of the least-compassionate people I've ever known were women, for starters. And then she gives examples of successful women who ditch everything to "teach pregnant girls poetry"--so, it begs the question: WHERE'S THE PROBLEM? She's just shown that women can have both lucrative careers that were once dominated by men, AND also have the option of quitting and doing something feel-good that probably pays shit wages (often because they're married to men who earn enough to allow them to do whatever they want). Whatever the cause of women's increased unhappiness (IF that's actually true), it's not lack of career choices and limits on education--not in this day and age. And I also don't think it's from women having to behave like men to fit into a man's world.

[omega minimo]

65. Thanks for a thoughtful post...... but why so hostile.

There's a potential for discussion there. Why are you pissed off?

[Hannah Bell]

116. It's from both men & women having to follow the logic of capital.

[liberal_at_heart]

66. why are these argument aimed at women?

These are questions for all people, both genders, men and women. I don't think women have to give up being successful career women. They just have to demand the same priviledges that men have been giving themselves for years. Men have learned how to work and be a part of their children's lives. Men get to leave work for a two hour lunch so that they can go watch their kid's recital at school and then go right back to work, no problem. But if a woman leaves work to care for her kids it is seen as non productive. There is still a very strong undertone of disrespect for women in our society. Just like in the feminist era we have to demand the right to have a career and a family. We have the right to have a balance, to have both.

[Kalyke]

67. I greatly disagree with a lot in this article.

While, I do agree that we've stripped so-called "feminine" subjects from school or our lives to our peril, I don't agree that they're necessarily feminine subjects.

Since when is art or music or volunteering or family dinners the sole responsibility of the feminine?

My career is not a male-assigned sex role and I'm not disappointed in my life as a woman. And I'm not "wired" to do something? Oh, the hell I'm not. Women aren't a monolith - what one woman can do, another woman cannot. Some men can multi-task, most cannot, but that doesn't mean they all can't. To say "women" aren't "wired" that way is the same as saying women aren't "wired" to do anything but take care of children or their husband's house. Grrr.

I do agree that society tends to center around masculine values, particularly in health research, and I do agree that women are under-represented both in the US and around the world, but I still would like to know why art and music are feminine and science and math are masculine? Can't each gender appreciate it all?

BTW, I'm a woman. A feminist and a person who generally stands up to ignorant males on these boards on topics of rape and sexual misconduct and bigotry against women.

I'm just a bit taken aback at this article and find it a bit sexist toward women and women's roles.

[liberal_at_heart]

70. my daughter enjoys both

My daughter is a bit of a Renaissance girl. Her hobbies include drawing and writing stories. However, her career goals are to be a veterinarian surgeon. I am proud of the young woman she is becoming.

[omega minimo]

73. I agree

with your skeptical observations. I wonder if she made herself less clear by using "femininity" and "the feminine" interchangeably.

In context I take her point, but her comment about art and music is clunky. Preceded by what she really is describing as "the feminine:"

"While no one can question the centrality of survival, this value system, heavily weighted toward the masculine, neglects the things that make life worth living, like beauty, graciousness, compassion, and relatedness. The very things that hold the world together are relegated to the status of luxuries."

"We are starved for grace and beauty, sensuality and spaciousness. Women want to bring their feminine gifts to the world. We want to be honored--and paid--as successful, powerful women, not as replicas of successful, powerful men."

"Beneath their achievement-oriented lives, most women crave passion, beauty, connection, and a sense of the sacred."
*****************

A couple comments in the thread were that the article describes mid life crises that affect women and men. This could be read in that sense -- of the feminine being reintroduced to our common lives and women and men being "disappointed" or fed up with living programmed behavior that is dysfunctional: "competing like men, organizing their time like men, and putting out aggressive energy like men, until they are exhausted."

Maybe all our lives are ready for an egalitarian revision.


"Whether they know it or not, the people who show up in my office nearly always have some unfulfilled potential, which is threatening to undermine the tenuous personality balance they have achieved by burying inconvenient parts of themselves. At first my clients hope I will help them silence those annoying parts once and for all, but instead I invite them to speak. As we probe, we begin to find answers to Freud's age-old question: What do women want? It is not, as Freud suspected, exactly what men want. Beneath their achievement-oriented lives, most women crave passion, beauty, connection, and a sense of the sacred. (They also want some sleep, which current research shows women need more than men, in order to feel content.)

"The inconvenient parts are the feminine parts. My clients have spent their lives trying to best men; competing like men, organizing their time like men, and putting out aggressive energy like men, until they are exhausted. One client tells me her father used to punch her in the arm when she would cry, and say "Be a man." I am sure he thought he was toughening up his daughter to survive in what is still a man's world. He wanted to empower her. He did not understand that her emotions could empower her as a woman."

<>


"They are disappointed in the limitations of a society that was, and still is, for the most part, organized around men and masculine values as essential, and women and feminine values as "other," as Simone de Beauvoir observed so long ago. They are disappointed that the very voice that could save us by bringing balance to our world is not welcome at the table."

[MilesColtrane]

72. I don't see Art as a feminine value.

I see it as a human value.

[omega minimo]

76. Neither does the author.

[MilesColtrane]

77. She's certainly implying that art and music are neglected because they aren't masculine values.

"this value system, heavily weighted toward the masculine, neglects the things that make life worth living, like beauty, graciousness, compassion, and relatedness. The very things that hold the world together are relegated to the status of luxuries. Art and music get eliminated from our schools."

[omega minimo]

81. No, she is stating that this value system neglects the things that make life worth living.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6821725&mesg_id=6825118

She is stating that:

"...this value system, heavily weighted toward the masculine, neglects the things that make life worth living..."

"The very things that hold the world together are relegated to the status of luxuries."

And those things, neglected and relegated to the status of luxuries include:

"Art and music get eliminated from our schools. There is no time in our busy lives for volunteering, family dinners, or musical evenings around the piano, no time for friends or community festivals."

[MilesColtrane]

84. Oh, I know what she's stating.

[Romulox]

87. Then she assigned genders to those value systems.

Survival = male
Beauty = female

Does this work:

Engineering = male?
Homemaking = female?

How about:

icky stuff = male?
nice stuff = female?

:shrug:

[omega minimo]

89. Please show where she does that.

[Romulox]

91. It's her basic thesis: that women have denied their "feminity"

which she defines as a longing for "beauty, graciousness, compassion, and relatedness":

Our society sees the feminine as extraneous at best, and dangerous at worst. Our decisions as individuals, families, and as a nation are based on what we call survival needs: what we deem to be real, practical, and necessary for physical existence, like efficiency and defense. While no one can question the centrality of survival, this value system, heavily weighted toward the masculine, neglects the things that make life worth living, like beauty, graciousness, compassion, and relatedness. The very things that hold the world together are relegated to the status of luxuries. Art and music get eliminated from our schools.

If positive (not to say self-flattering!) attributes may be attributed to gender, I'm wondering if it's OK to assign negative attributes based on gender as well?

E.g.

Survival = masculine
Beauty = feminine

then

Nagging = feminine
Direct language = masculine


Does that work? Because it's precisely the same sort of argument (just not self-flattering, like the OP.) :shrug:

[omega minimo]

93. Yes, I think she makes it confusing

by interchanging " the feminine" and "femininity." They are different. There are different attributes related to "the feminine" in the larger sense.

[Romulox]

99. If she means that all people have "masculine" and "feminine" aspects--yin and yang

then I will agree. But she didn't really mean that, I think. If she did, she really should've made it explicit, as my reading is more natural.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

94. Oh, bullshit

Men and women without the means to call their own shots are slaves to the corporate masters who run everything and make them sacrifice a normal life for a paycheck. It has nothing to do with testosterone or estrogen and everything to do with who's got the power of manipulation in the office to make others be their lapdogs while they reap the rewards, take numerous vacations, horde the bonuses and have everyone else cover for them while they goof off. And in my office building, the one who gets everyone else to dance for them happens to be a woman. Not even the site supervisor, just an upper management stoolie lucky enough to have the one person who could fire her for being such a childish, rude, lazy boor working halfway across the country.

[conscious evolution]

96. They should be.Without women

we would not be where we are today as human beings.
Consider what women did
They invented housing to shelter their babies
They invented agriculture to feed their babies
they invented clothing to protect their babies from the elements
They invented medicine to heal their babies.

Men did none of this stuff because once they impregnated the woman they took off,leaving the women to fend for themselves.

Women should be at the table.Without them we would still be feral animals.

[Confusious]

114. And you know this from where?....eom

[LeftishBrit]

97. Full of stereotypes IMO

Neither research in psychology, nor history, confirms these stereotypes of the male and female roles. Yes, there is a general statistical tendency for men to be more aggressive than women. No, 'beauty, graciousness, compassion, and relatedness' are not characteristics that define, or are reserved, for women.

'we have millions of sleepless, cranky women spending their lives in the fast lane and running on adrenaline, which women are not wired to do.'

Are men? Neither gender evolved to live in big cities, commute in the rush hour, or work for large and demanding firms. But we did evolve to be adaptable to a wide variety of circumstances, far more than other animals. Humans are not 'wired' to fulfil the social roles of a particular time or place, and theories that assume that they are, are over-simplistic. And let us not be over-romantic about the past. There were doubtless plenty of 'sleepless cranky women running on adrenaline' 100 years ago, when they might have to give birth to and raise 10 children in fairly close succession, while cooking and cleaning for the large family without modern technology, and living under the constant threat of infectious diseases that were more likely than not to kill at least 2 or 3 of the children.

'There is no time in our busy lives for volunteering, family dinners, or musical evenings around the piano'

Nor was there in the past for the majority. These were luxuries for the wealthy. In fact, technology and reduced demand for hard manual labour by both genders, means that nowadays people on average have *more* time for activities not directly aimed at survival. If they often choose TV or computer games over 'musical evenings around the piano', this has little to do with 'masculine values'. The author is taking a very sentimentalized view of the past, and seems to ignore the lives of anyone outside the 'gentry' or at least the upper middle classes.

There simply isn't the sharp opposition between masculine and feminine values that is being portrayed here. Differences exist, but this article practically implies that men and women are, or should be, different species.

[omega minimo]

100. IMHO the writer is referring to a bigger picture of influence re:masculine values and "the feminine"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6821725#6827299

[LeftishBrit]

106. What bothers me is the whole idea that there is a particular value system that can be called 'the

feminine'. Values are not masculine or feminine; they are human. Social roles, and some biological characteristics, may be masculine or feminine; but 'values' are not.

[saltpoint]

120. All that loud cheering and affirmation you're hearing right now is coming

from my house. The dissolution of "masculine" and "feminine" into the larger psychic landscape seems right to me also, and fair, and worthy of respect and affection.

Artists seem to know this instinctively from extremely early ages and would endorse your position very convincingly.

T. S. Eliot. Dar Williams. Da Vinci. That bunch.

[TwilightGardener]

108. You bring up a good point about the "busy lives" no-free-time assertion

this writer makes--if women aren't doing certain activities in their spare time that SHE deems appropriate, it's because they're just too busy in a man's world to make those "correct" feminine choices. But SOMEONE is watching all that TV, logging in to Facebook, etc.

[woo me with science]

104. Victimhood is the ultimate aphrodisiac for some.

Hearts pounding. Can't speak.

In the words of Sarah McLachlan,

"...This glorious sadness that brings me to my knees..."

[LeftishBrit]

107. Despite the whiny tone, I don't think victimhood is the fundamental issue

It's a certain romanticisation of the 'feminine' role combined with totally ignoring the fact that whether more attention is focused on survival or on beauty depends far more on economic and other environmental factors than on gender issues. When survival is literally or metaphorically threatened, that is what people focus on. Once survival is assured, people are free to concentrate on other things.

With all her sentimental praise of The Feminine, the author doesn't sound all that fundamentally different from many others who sentimentalize a supposedly more spiritually virtuous past, when gender roles were clearer, and women's role was (as one of our more old-fashioned teachers told my class in the mid-1970s): "to nourish, uphold and sustain!" Some of the most fundamentally sexist people are those who flatter women the most - providing flattery as a substitute for equal rights.

[Hannah Bell]

110. I'm a woman; women can be every bit as sneaky, small-minded, & vicious as men.

& when in positions of power, they are just as ruthless. I hate working for women. In almost every case my female bosses have been worse than my male ones - as people, in their behavior to their employees.

I think this is horseshit, personally.

It's not about male v. female.

[Confusious]

115. +1

Though my grandma is the best!

[Blue-Jay]

117. I am woman, hear me roar. Watch me throw up on the floor...

Why are people still replying to this stupid thread?

Don't answer. I'm just going to hide it anyhow.

[saltpoint]

119. Agree. In the working world both male and female bosses can be

real pills.

Agree also that their behaving as they do is not gender-based. It seems almos to be a behavioral disorder where the boss takes on a role of power and superiority over people lower on the ladder.