SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

...would we not be better served to acknowledge natural strengths and weaknesses at both ends of the spectrum and jointly use complimentary strengths to negate the weaknesses inherent in each other?

Strengths and weaknesses generally reside in individuals, not in genders or other classes.

Yeah, if I were looking for a soprano or a bass, I'd expect to find them among woman and men respectively.

But if I had a tech job to do and based my search on gender, I'd miss Marie Curie, NASAs early 'computers,' some of the Enigma decoders....

[This message edited by sisoon at 11:58 AM, August 11th (Tuesday)]

I agree with DV and find the term "toxic masculinity" imprecise and sort of a hammer-nail term. As Meryl Streep pointed out not long ago, women can be just as toxic as men. The term seems to have originated out of critical theory grievance studies academia, and has more than a slight misandrist flavor to it. Critical theory departments have already been shown to be intellectually hollow post-modernist enterprises (the recent "Grievance Studies Scandal" in which five left-leaning academics were able to publish more than seven jabberwocky fake papers in so-called academic journals is pretty good recent evidence for this).

Strengths and weaknesses generally reside in individuals, not in genders or other classes.

Yeah, if I were looking for a soprano or a bass, I'd expect to find them among woman and men respectively.

But if I had a tech job to do and based my search on gender, I'd miss Marie Curie, NASAs early 'computers,' some of the Enigma decoders....

Exactly. And more anecdotally, if I need help moving furniture in my house, I'm going to ask my son before asking my very short petite daughter. Physical strength is a real difference. When I want help doing anything regarding home improvement, tools or mechanical skills, I ask my daughter. She is far better at those skills than my son is. He can tell her the capital city in any country in the world, but she's the one who changes the lightbulbs in their bathroom. Her father is a master mechanic and she inherited his genius in that area. My son inherited my nerdiness. If you look at gender only, you'd expect my son is helping me install ceiling fans and mend the fence and deck. You'd be very wrong.

[This message edited by DevastatedDee at 12:11 PM, August 11th (Tuesday)]

When people here say that the language offends them, DictumVeritas, how is it NOT toxic to defend it instead of offering to change it? Do our feelings not matter to you? Is your selfish need to vent with 'abrasive' language directed at the women you hate more important than other women sharing how offended they are or other men sharing how offended they were when they had that language directed at them?

If I offend someone (which I am sure I do upon occasion without meaning to) and they tell me I offended them, how would it be 'toxic' for me to add additional context to better explain what I meant? That type of 'defending' is really different IMHO to the ones that just double-down on something offensive for the sake of being shocking.

But TBH, if I add that additional context and they are still offended... ? Well, I can't help their feelings and what caused them to feel that way. All I can do is know that I did not mean to offend or hurt feelings, apologize for doing so if necessary, and let the other party deal with what they need to deal with.

TLDR - it is possible to respect feelings and people while still holding opposing viewpoints about something. Defending one's POV isn't toxic so long as it is done respectfully. Just my 0.02.

Strengths and weaknesses generally reside in individuals, not in genders or other classes.

Genetically speaking we are surprisingly close to a fruit fly. This shows that small differences make for huge changes.

Not just our blue-prints but also our operating systems are encoded in our genes. There is no reason to limit the expression of genes to externally observable traits, such as sexual organs or strength and exclude mental function from what is encoded. In fact, it is not wise to do so.

I am a programmer and I can write programs that will run on a SISC processor, but is optimized for RISK and visa versa (Not quite as succinctly as this, but stated towards illustration).

A processor will always perform better running native code rather than interpreting registers not optimized for it.

Thus, can an individual, male or female perform the same tasks with the same amount of comfort, yes, but not as a rule. Can they both perform interpreted tasks and native tasks, yes.

Let's just say, it's never optimal to run interpreted tasks, to give a system the best optimal performance, it's best to run tasks native to the processor.

Reality does not bend to our wishes that it were different.

Ellie, I know you're coming from a good place, so no, I wasn't looking for, nor is any form is an apology required. I just hope I don't owe anyone one myself.

[This message edited by DictumVeritas at 12:40 PM, August 11th (Tuesday)]

Dv

Once again if your idea of a “male” job is doctor lawyer president plumber farmer IT person you are needlessly making gender an issue when it shouldnt be

If your idea of “ male “ job is sperm donor i think we can all agree thats a fair point .

The devil is in the details , i believe fruit flies would miss that type of nuance but I expect more from programmers

I agree with DV and find the term "toxic masculinity" imprecise and sort of a hammer-nail term. As Meryl Streep pointed out not long ago, women can be just as toxic as men.

Thumos, I think a big part of the problem with the term is that it is very dependent on the context in which it is used and also how it is defined by the person using it.

To me TM is all of those silly societal 'rules' that in order to 'be a man', a guy is not allowed to be sensitive or vulnerable or what have you without being looked at as somehow 'less than'. Not 100% certain but I think that was the original kind of definition for it. But as so many things are, the original meaning has been corrupted over time and in quite a few instances now, it is used more like the hammer-nail you described.

And no disagreement with you or Meryl that women can be just as toxic. IMHO it's sometimes even worse because women tend to be more circumspect in their toxicity than men because of how girls are conditioned to 'be nice'. Yet one more reason why I suck as a girl - ain't nobody got time for that 'nice' bullshit

Ellie, I know you're coming from a good place, so no, I wasn't looking for, nor is any form is an apology required. I just hope I don't owe anyone one myself.

LOL You and me are all good DV!

Just pointing out that IMHO defending one's POV isn't toxic so long as it is done with due care and respect for the other party... There is always room for disagreements and differences of opinion, so long as care is shown to be respectful of others thoughts and feelings. Again, that's just my humble little opinion anyways.

siracha,

We find that groups tend to gravitate naturally to what they enjoy.

Sweden being a prime example, even with women having been encouraged to enter into STEM fields as early as the 60s and the professional market sponsored by various incentives, the STEM fields remain male dominated and roles of care, including doctors, are dominated by women.

Why is it such a bone of contention that general groupings with different specialties exist?

If I need a building planned, I definitely don't want a neural-surgeon, who hates city planning to do it. He would hate the task and personally I think an architect would provide the expertise and passion required for the project. The idea that traits extend passed the individual into biological group is actually based in statistically verifiable and observable fact.

Could the surgeon do it, most probably, but why would we want that?

ETA

Are there neural-surgeons who would rather have been architects, sure, but not as a rule.

[This message edited by DictumVeritas at 1:04 PM, August 11th (Tuesday)]

Since I also said toxic masculinity- I agree with the way it was explained by most of the women here- BSR explained it well.

There is toxic femininity as well. My mom telling me I looked like a cow in my pants and needed a diet. Or to put on lipstick. Or the implication men are in charge in marriage. We have things that perpetuate too that really is designed to shame us into specific behaviors or ways of thinking.

What I was saying was meant to be in defense of the men here not against them. Meaning sometimes they need a minute. Sometimes they don’t want you to call his wife a whore or to rub his nose into something. The intention is to make them mad enough to take up for themselves so I know the intention is good but it’s not always helpful. Especially after they were just annihilated. Some

Of the bh’s have said to me this is right but they don’t even feel like they can speak up in this thread.

It’s really just a reminder to be a little gentler when you can. Not in defense of the cheating party but in favor of the bh.

Perhaps the disparity Bigger refers to re responding to domestic violence calls is due to underreporting due to embarrassment by male victims. Or, because for a long time, if it was a she said/he said situation, the man got charged absent some pretty good evidence supporting his story.

I seem to recall reading about studies by the CDC and some other government agency that indicated that female on male violence in domestic partner situations was slightly more prevalent. I believe in read about a study by some professor from New Hampshire who had compiled statistics from something like 300 separate studies that supported this conclusion.

I was doing criminal defense work approximately at the same time Bigger was on the force and the disparity in males being charged was profound. Yet, as Ern Prizy pointed out in her observations of the women who came to her shelter, it was clear to me that a lot of the women in these cases were, historically, very violent.

I would have to research whether or not Sweden has had defined cultural roles and to what extent compared with other countries to answer that properly. That would take a while.

I can speak with pretty solid confidence as a woman who does not fit the cultural stereotypes here. If my brain is so very different from a man's brain, then I would expect to see that reflected in my personal interests and likes and dislikes. I would expect to have not been able to have so many male friends in my lifetime and been able to understand and communicate with them so clearly. I would expect to have far more difficulties in my job which has nothing to do with nurturing anything. I would not expect to relate to a BH like I do to a BW.

When I hear that we should celebrate our differences, it's usually from someone who wants me fitting into a certain role. I cannot tell you how fucked you would be if I were your SAHM. I wouldn't be the one you'd want running the daycare center. If you want specifics on a state regulation about something, you probably do want to talk to me. By gender role, I should not be doing what I do. The VP above me should not be doing what she does while her husband is a stay-at-home father. Gender roles are enforced by society. Things have changed and are continuing to change, but changes like this do not happen overnight and there are expectations and assumptions that will linger for a long while more.

BTW, women are supposedly better at verbal acuity. Your writing is quite eloquent.

Well, I can't help their feelings and what caused them to feel that way.

Ok, yes. That is my point. If they choose to speak in a way that offends, they do not care about the feelings of other posters. We're asking for a language adjustment, not a career change. I am very skilled at understanding what people mean when they say, "I like my offensiveness and will not change." Half of us are married to them.

Perhaps the disparity Bigger refers to re responding to domestic violence calls is due to underreporting due to embarrassment by male victims.

It probably has a lot to do with embarassment and a lot to do with the results of the violence. Me punching a man is not going to do anywhere near the damage that a man punching me will do. The consequences of violence from man to woman are more life-threatening than the other way around.

DevastatedDee,

Thank you for the compliment. It is especially appreciated seeing that English is indeed my third language.

I have stated previously in this thread that clichés exist and persist because of veracity at their core.

The cliché I'd site now is that it is the exception that proves the rule.

I feel society is actually doing a huge disservice to both genders by trying to force us to be the same, rather than complimentary. We do indeed see a lot of miserable people because of it.

If we went about our business without agenda or animosity and allow for a natural order, I think we all would be a lot happier.

Unfortunately, such a huge proportion of humanity has entrenched their identities into a manufactured agenda to fit a manufactured and media propagated goal, rather than a natural progression and evolution of the self.

[This message edited by DictumVeritas at 1:29 PM, August 11th (Tuesday)]

I think you will find many other people like you, Dee. But, not the majority.

According to this Jordan Peterson fellow, in Scandinavia, where he claims there is legislation that promotes equal opportunities and outcomes for both genders, some type of testing indicates the differences in preferences between the genders is greater than in countries with no such agenda.

He claims females dominate the nursing profession and men engineering by wide margins.

But, he acknowledges that there are many examples of exceptions.

I was the primary nurturer with my kids, softer hearted and much more hands on. Yet, I did not neccesarily fit the image of a nurturer. I was a former jock, accomplished athlete in college. But, I loved changing diapers, reading to my kids, bathing them, packing their lunches and cooking for them. I was the one that took them to virtually all their medical appointments.( a lot of this disparity was due to my XW absences,required to sustain her serial cheating.)

Half of us are married to them.

Or they were one of our parents!

Perhaps the disparity Bigger refers to re responding to domestic violence calls is due to underreporting due to embarrassment by male victims. Or, because for a long time, if it was a she said/he said situation, the man got charged absent some pretty good evidence supporting his story.

To me, this definitely falls into all those toxic femininity/masculinity issues too though. Men would not report as much because they are somehow seen as weak for 'allowing' their wife to hit them. Men are conditioned by societal crap to feel 'embarrassed' in those situations. When the issue shouldn't be that at all, but instead that physical violence no matter who is perpetrating it, is never okay.

There's a lot of skewed and toxic thinking on a societal level that needs to majorly change IMHO. And as for feminism as I am, in a lot of ways I think it affects men in subtler but more profound ways. Examples you say? The thought that in a DV situation, the guy is to blame. When divorcing, women are awarded custody the vast majority of the time - regardless of whether they are the more stable parent. When a woman gets pregnant, she can go after the guy for child support even if he didn't want a child. That there is still some thinking that men can't be victims of sexual assault or domestic violence. All of that is old antiquated thinking that has got to change with the times.

Actually Dee, a woman cold cocking a man, say in the face or throat, or using an object, as is often done could very well result in serious injury, particularly if one's wife, like mine, is in great shape( she was all state in three sports and can hit a golf ball a mile).

No, it is true men are stronger, in general but not alw as ys. And, one's strength does not prevent tissue damage ifvstruckmviolently in a vulnerable spot, particularly if it is unexpected or young DDT I'd not see it coming.

Even a woman of average strength can Dome lot of damage. And, manybare well above average.

** POSTING AS A MEMBER **

Genetically speaking we are surprisingly close to a fruit fly. This shows that small differences make for huge changes.

Not just our blue-prints but also our operating systems are encoded in our genes.

How do you presume to think you know what human behavior comes from nature and what part comes from nurture?

I think I understand what you're getting at in your chosen name, though I don't think it works grammatically. Even if it does, though, taking on the mantle of truth doesn't mean you actually know the truth.

At this point, too much is unknown about gender differences and about human malleability. I suspect the only provable differences between men and women are their roles in reproduction, and I'm not all that sure that can be proven by scientific method.

*****

As for 'imprecise' language: all language is imprecise, especially when it comes to words that represent concepts. That's why it's a good idea to agree on definitions before discussing concepts.

Remember, it's said that the US and UK are 2 countries separated by a common language.

[This message edited by sisoon at 1:39 PM, August 11th (Tuesday)]

Thank you for the compliment. It is especially appreciated seeing that English is indeed my third language.

Count me extra impressed!

I don't feel forced to be the same as men at all. I don't think that's what anyone is wishing for, that we all meet some standard way of thinking and being based on a societally-constructed gender definition. My take is that we are far more different as individuals than we are male vs female. The freedom to be the person you are is what matters. There should not be more value in being male or female. I'm likely a bigger fan of shoes and make-up than you are, lol, but that doesn't affect my ability to think rationally or perform a task.