Are we different than men?

Like I said, maturity is not an inherent quality of an action, although sometimes it is the feeling behind such an act. Maybe dave ,your husband {?} , did not feel very safe backing him up in a fight, so his loyalty to his friend was overturned by his loyalty to his physical body, maturity (the idea that he deserves to be stopped because he is causing harm to so man people) here may not even come in to play.

 

yes, i would.

 

no, not really. dave just got over his "back you buddies up at all costs" hellraising days, he grew up. learning right and wrong and being mature enough to act upon it is a good thing.

 

No i don't think so, I think he was just afraid that he will go to jail if he supported his friend.

 

*snicker* "HI MOM! I'M IN JAIL!!"

 

... I have two words... social construct

 

thass what I said in my first post, just not nearly as cool as you said it

 

well, obviously men and women are different. women are more emotional because they have to be able to show their emotions. otherwise, when a mother raises her child, they child wont feel as loved and stuff like that. men had to be less showing off their emotions since ya know, you cant have some cave man kill a saber tooth and start crying. wouldnt work. both guys and girls are logical in their own ways. but often we cant see rationality in each others words maybe.

if you mean by law should girls be treated and talked to differently? fuck no. but most girls wouldnt want to be talked to by me like i do to my guy friends. since often guys talk to each other with many insults, comments, interuptions, etc. ill say to my friend, maybe "get the fuck over here you basterd" or something. but i wouldnt say that to a girl. cause the girl would probbly get pissed.

i kinda lost where i was going and lost my thought pattern....

 

If women weren't different from men, they wouldn't have invented kitchens or rolling pins.

 

women use metamessages a lot, meaning a lot of females (not all) talk indirectly. for an example, a male will ask a female, "what do you want for your birthday?" and she replies "nothing," but she really meant that he better get her a gift. Males need direct messages to communicate and get things done.

Duck, what you're getting at is social conditioning. That starts in elementary school. girls tend to have small groups that contain all females. The reason why they stick up for eachother is because if they don't, then it is viewed as "betraying" the group. Metamessages also play out here. A girl may take the fact that her girl friends did not stick up for as agreeing with whatever is happening. For an example, if a girl is called "fat" and if her girl friends do not defend her, then she thinks that they agree that she is fat. Males stick with larger groups. They come and go in the group.

I hope that made sense. Anthropology is pretty neat.

 

Horse hockey.

This thread escalated quicker than I thought.

 

it starts from infancy, things like blue for boys, pink for girls, dolls for girls, cars for boys... we construct gender roles from a very early age. Part of the problem of analysing why we do this is that those who try to analyse social constructs are not apart from it, and connot possibly offer an objective look at the eway we construct gender roles to determine just how much of it is society and how much is biology

 

Are you saying that years of research in social anthropology is just a waste of time?

 

not a waste of time, but it is inherently faulted

 

In that case, I agree!

 

as are all fields of theory, since they are based on faulted, limited, and biased human thought

 

That's like saying that a womyn can accuse any man who DOESN'T use emotion in his arguments IF he uses both emotion and logic, as being cold and emotioanlly dead. It's silly.

IF the logic is missed,in my or any other womyn's argument, because someone on the recieving end, is concentrating on the emotion in a discussion, to the exclusion of the logic, in an discussion which requires both, it is the one who cannot understand BOTH logic and emotion in the same arena who has the problem, not the one who USES both logic and emotion.

 

Ha! the idea of actually proposing an argument is to get your point across, if you give it with a mumbo jumbo of emotion + logic and the other guy misses the point , then it is not his fault, it is yours for not presenting it in the manner that is appropriate for everyone to understand.

 

if a person is arguing without really listening, it IS that person's fault for not making the effort to come fully and fairly to the discussion. one's own personal issues frequently make one difficult to communicate with. if you're not ready to listen you'll never understand what's being said.

 

I agree , -if the person is not listening it is his fault. But this is about some one like maggie making an argument that twists emotion with logic and this makes the other person get lost and not find the logic... then it is the "argument maker"'s fault, not the "listener"'s.