A different look at feminist philosophy.

First, I want to raise a few caveats about this before I get into something that makes me sound insensitive or misogynisticor ungrounded in philosophy.



Ok, first, I guess I don't know where this question belongs in the philosophy realm, metaphysics, ethics ect. so I hope I'm in the right forum. Anyway, next I want to say that this is purely a thought experiment of some perhaps drunkin/stoned and misguided epiphany and I really hope I do not offend anyone with this. I must say I don't know all that much about feminism other than mostly eco-feminism and some political perspectives.



Anyway, here I go. In many species and I would say ours included there are obvious differences between males and females (obviously I'm not talking about just sex organs and breasts, but other physical characteristics). Look at birds, elephant seals, ungulates (deer, elk, bison, ect), lions, even orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees. At least purely physical differences in size are noticeable. That got me thinking that the different sexes have different roles to play that better serve the community as a whole. It is as if evolution has divided certain roles for each sex to specialize in. I know that sounds contentious and deeply problematic as to where I'm going with this but I don't even know if I believe this myself, as I said earlier it is purely a thought experiment.

Here is where I begin to encounter very shaky ground. But I believe there is psychological data to back this up (although I don't have an extensive knowledge of psychology), that is that males and females have different mental specializations. Actually, I remember this pretty well, that women are better at multi-tasking than men. This is the only example I can recall at this time, but I believe there are others. Insofar as there is different mental specialization between the sexes, which may(?) follow from the physical differences that there may also be mental differences. I am not talking about mental capacities but mental specializations and I am saying on average.

One of the most basic feminist arguments is that men are generally seen as having more rational capabilities and women as having more emotional capabilities. I want to Problematize this here. I guess I should say right now, that I want to draw out this dichotomy. I don't mean emotional as uncontrollable, "hysterical" sense (as it is typically seen in feminist arguments). I guess what I'm asking is, if this dichotomy may be true to some extent in that there may be a grain of truth in here. I guess I am saying that women may be better at picking up on emotional cues than men.

I really don't want to make this dichotomous, saying that men are more rational than women because that sounds horribly sexist. But philosophy often makes us see through central tenants of our society. For example the allegory of the cave tears apart the liberal conception of equality.

Anyway, could it be that this rational/emotional dichotomy that is seen by feminists as completely absurd has a grain of truth in it?

I know I sound horrible right now, but here is where I switch from being a misogynist into more of a feminist perspective. Saying there is a grain of truth in this dichotomy seems completely anti-feminist. I want to say that it is true that our society values rationality over ability to read emotional cues. But I would say that both these abilities, rationality and emotional reading, serve very important functions and that one is not categorically better than the other. The sexism comes into play in that our society is structured in that it differently values and rewards the rational over the emotional reading aspect. I think this is where the sexism is located. But I don't think that one is really better than the other, it is just what society values. So basically my huge question is: is there a grain of truth in this rational/emotional distinction between men and women?

I could go on and try to draw this out further, but this post is getting long and its getting late. I sincerely hope I didn't offend anyone or come off as a sexist pig, I just thought of the differences and thought they served an equally valuable role. I hope you all understand that this idea is deeply troubling to me, but I think that’s where the best philosophy happens, when you let go of societal norms and expectations and just say what you thought about. I'm not saying the differnece is great, I'm saying there is may be a grain of truth to it.Don't hate me I'm just thinking. Also, I understand that this sort of rhetoric is dammaging to women but I think it is a societal value problem more than anything else. I almost appologize for having this thought, but I did think about it and I wanted some feedback on this.

---Edited on 4-26 below here.---

I'm not saying men are more rational, just that women have more interpersonal skills are are better at picking up emmotional cues. Also, as said before I feel really uncomfortable about posting this and this is just an exploration of a thought. I don't really believe this but it is an option in the formation of the emmotional/rational dichotomy that is pretty fundamental to femminism.

 

The way I understand it, feminism is more a question of a woman's entitlement to equal social privileges than biological, psychological, or emotional superiority/inferiority/equality whatever.

The problem is, it originally took cues from all sorts of radical and militant movements in order to first get heard, and ended up coming off as an anti-men movement... to the point where any man attempting to make comments on it immediately feels extremely defensive and has to qualify everything he's saying and distance himself from the comment!

 

you sound very afraid to ask a question that some may object to. Good grief unchain your mind.

So I eliminated your equivocating and was still left with much unneeded verbiage. I further reduced it and rearranged it into what I think you were actually asking for a debate about.

Statement of Controversy
One of the most basic feminist arguments is that men are generally seen as having more rational capabilities and women as having more emotional capabilities. This rational/emotional dichotomy is seen by feminists as completely absurd. Are these ideas really absurd as a general rule?

Propositions
1. The different sexes have different roles to play that better serve the community as a whole.

2. Evolution has divided certain roles for each sex to specialize in.

Supporting Statement

In many species, there are obvious differences between males and females. Look at birds, elephant seals, ungulates (deer, elk, bison, ect), lions, even orangutan, gorillas, chimpanzees. At least purely physical differences in size are noticeable.

3. Both rationality and emotional reading serve very important functions in the survival of a species..

Conclusion
There is a grain of truth in the idea of a rational/emotional distinction between men and women.

Please debate.

 

Most, if any psychological differences in males and females of the human species would be difficult to prove, as it would invaribly involve learned behaviors.

 

I agree until certain point with the statement of the OP. Both sexes have strong and weak areas, it is a reality, but we should never make generalizations and just look at the individual standing before us.
I think this is what feminism really stands for, that just because guys are usually better at math, doesn't mean A girl is better than A guy in math and just because girls are better listeners doesn't mean A guy isn't a better listener than A girl.
Should each sex embrace their strengths and be proud of them? of course, it is what we are designed for. You accept who you are, but does that means that you are just gonna fall into certain role just because of your sex? no, that would be crazy and kinda boring too.

 

The female human as a direct reflection of the "Mother" is always going to be the consummate Tantric Yogin, providing Her Karma has Her centered into a strong devotional stance.

 

I believe that the world has to primary beliefs.
Reality are more male aspet.
Feminisim a nurturing aspect.
Theres a devine reason for this.
Thats why I cant exclude the existance of a God.
Call it womens intuition or call it moj moj..
I dont care.
I know i'm gifted.I dont care how crazy that sounds.
My dreams of to vivid..
my emotions are to intune..For me not to be blessed...
Our mindes are to deep not to have some influince on each other...
maybe I've lost you .
If I hang around a chick alot my cycal will change to be intune with her.
Like when My sisters and I are around each other.If one is having theres I can bet mine is going to get thrown off track.Or visaversa.
How is it we as humans evolved,and other animals didnt.well they did...but not like we have...You can explain evolution you can explain the big bang. I except that as proven ,but.....
How do you explain .The curiousity itself that gave you the erge to know this...Why were given the knowledge to read the stars.if there just there in space...
I know were here for a devine reason.Or we would be crawling around on all 4s too.
Why I can hear music in the trees and everyone else thinks I'm crazy....
Its not telling me to be son of Sam.lol....thats Crazy!!!!
More like when you turn on the radio and that song comes out thats your favorite and it releases you...And some how you know what you need to know now to get thruogh the day...

.......like that......With no Radio thow...Just the trees... The sky ,The water and the wind singing in my ear....Telling me where to go leading me .On my quest..

 

lol you say "You can explain evolution you can explain the big bang". Um both are HUGE theories that are just as correct as aliens bringing down life forms from the starts. The theories about the big bang are almost as ludacris as the thought of a higher being. Sorry but science wins...Most animals havent evolved such as humans because of ONE dinstinct feature, speech. Speech has giving the opportunity for humans to mentally become intelligent and to excel in life. Though think 5,000 yrs ago when humans were around ( o yes your bible has feed u lies on dates) humans were no different then animals. No speech, no drama, no gay forums, no weed toking lol but God was something created to make people feel like life had a purpose. God was needed when plagues were killing off half the worlds populations. Now that we have grown, god isnt needed to fulfil fantasies of floating clouds and gold brickways.

 

I think the belief of god also came from a lack of understanding why people were so intune with themselves. How come animals know when danger is coming when humans dont. Or those humans withgreat minds and longed for a free people.those Ideas must come from God .I for one define god and devine as the unexplainable forces of nature. The unexplained. I agree that a terrible time in history gave forth oportunity to say it was a devine intervention.i also believe that this was usedto not only heal a people but also as a way to control a people. ...Read books(Secrets to the Holly Grail)....also check out (www.angelfire.com) . the facts in their are true do I believe its satan and gods doing .lolNo... I think its peoples doing you have good people you have bad people, but it does show intresing facts on how Leaders have used the existance of god and the existance of satan as a way to supress people and remain in controle. Do I believe these people are crazy enough to believe that they are decendants from God or saton ,and that there use of this so called information will cause the destuction of all of us? YES!!!!!!
but anyways got a little of track......I believe the deviney has evolved into something a liitle more believeable.....When something is wrong back home I can feel it . When my sisters or my children need me I know it.. That is devine...It hurts to hear of children being abused or their little lives taken..It hurts to see people make the same mistakes others have and throw their lives away just like that....The fact that I have these feelings to me is devine...I could be careless and carefree about other peoples problems I try to ingnore them but I cant...That to me is devine....The fact that I cant explain why I feel this way doesnt bother me ......The fact that i have not listend to these feelings and not used them to do something to be helpful to my people
that bothers me...if I take one lesson I ve learned threw all my whirlwind of mistakes in my life and use it to show some one that they atleats have a choose as to how hard their life can be and touch their heart by letting them know someone cares then i' ve done lifes worth of good work dispite the things I done that Im not proud of,and that isnt god ..thats me and that is devine!!!