Open thread for Women 2
Same rules as the last one.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, November 14th, 2006 at 20:38 and is filed under gender.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Simply a response to feeling patronized Teri, I might also add that you yourself can be quite passive aggressive, defensive and critical, but then that would be being like what I am critiquing so maybe I shouldn’t say that.
@Female: To end an unsolicited critique with the phrase “so maybe I shouldn’t say that” is so ultimately passive-aggressive that I hope you intended your last post as a joke. If you did, I will say I found it in poor taste. If you did not, I will say that your need to dominate can be tiresome. Not every conversation is a contest to be won.
Respectfully submitted.
To other readers of this thread, I apologize for the lengthy response to Female. You may not find it worth your while, but you’re welcome to read it.
@Female, you (or anyone) being (or not) an idiot is entirely independent of watching television.
Post 489 in this thread in response to your post 484 in the same thread. For those who don’t wish to visit MABTW, I’ll quote it: (NB- it is written much more forcefully than I’d write it here, given that it was written for MABTW)
This was the very spot you raised the issue in, and used Money as a citation. There’s your link, which has been available for about a week as a direct response to your initial post.
For days now, you have danced around the subject, making suppositions about what’s in what I linked rather than reading it. Now, you’ve taken to accusing me of not linking anything. I find this behavior frankly mystifying.
When you cite a man on gender mutability, who’s major practical body of work on the subject has been shown to be a destructive fraud, well, I don’t think you help your argument.
No, I’m arguing something subtly different: Gender mutability, I contend, doesn’t exist in most people. I have no strong opinion on Gender Constancy (whatever that may be) and have never mentioned the phrase. Indeed, neither have you until this very post (199 in this thread).
It is therefore difficult for me to understand (possibly I watch insufficient TV) how we can have been arguing about something neither of us ever mentioned.
Good grief!
I did this because you suggested I do it. From post 484 in the previous thread, where you raised this issue:
That’s why I did the test that you yourself suggested, and reported the results.
Is it possible that most boys and girls at some age don’t have a clear picture of what being male and female is? Perhaps. This is contrary to my views and observations, (and I think those of most parents!) but it is possible.
Is gender mutable in most cases? No way.
Regards,
-wolfe
test
Z and Teri, all I will say to you both is that if you don’t like my comments, then do not read them, nor waste your time responding to them, because I will not change nor heed the advice of anyone who I think is being exactly how they accuse me of being.
If someone casts judgement on me (condescending, whiny, whatever) then I will defend myself. If that means you feel you are dominated then ignore my posts because I don’t post out of a need to dominate and would actually prefer it myself not to have to continually justify myself to others. You either accept me or you don’t, but do not expect me to change for anyone.
Touche.
I am not espousing that gender is mutable, even though you think that is what I am doing, even though I have no idea why.
If you think my post on mabtw seemed to indicate gender is mutable, then yes it does, but only for the first 3 - 4 years of a child’s life before they obtain their stable sense of gender identity, which is derived from reaching an understanding of Gender Constancy.
As far as I know, we are not arguing but I do think that you have ignored my mentions of Gender Constancy and taken my post on mabtw a little too far or too seriously.
Of course I do not believe gender is indefinately mutable. How dumb do you think I am? Fess’ up as I would prefer not to engage in conversations where people are treating me like an idiot based on their own assumptions.
@wolfe: I was quite enjoying reading this line of reasoning regarding gender constancy vs mutability and was going to suggest you blog on it at some point, as it seems there are some readers who might have some pedestrian input (Diesel, Teri, myself?). I think now it’s gone off the rails, and I don’t much care to cross-reference to MABTW, but do consider it, won’t you? (I know, so many topics, so little time..)
My apologies for contributing what now looks like an impolite and altogether inappropriate-for-the-parlour post at 202. “Aggressive when provoked” indeed.
Contritely,
~Z~
I agree. I would like to know sometimes what I’m missing from the mabtw portions, as reference is made here to things as if we are jumping from one place to the other. I don’t make a fuss about this, as it is my own choice not to visit mabtw and I feel that if I’m missing those facts it’s my own fault.
As for my provoking comment to Female, I don’t really like where it took her (and us) so I apologize (to all) for my pettiness. I was in a provocative mood. It was friday and I hadn’t gotten laid in a couple of days.
@Teri (ONLY): If that’s your excuse, I shan’t apologize at all. I’ve got months’ worth of excuses to be petty.
Aw……..