What eats me up the most

[Stonestrike]

The definitions masculine and feminine. I see no difference in gender that isn't physical. People seem to think that sexism is just. You wanna know something? I'm male and I hate sports, hate fighting and want to lose weight more than wanting to gain muscle. The list goes on. I am more what they find "feminine" than "masculine". And don't get me wrong, women get it just as bad. Seriously, sexism is one form of discrimination that most people ignore.

[Dundee]

Yeah. As my science teacher would say, "All humans are exactly alike. There's only one race; the human race. The only difference between girls and boys are chemicals and different body masses in different places." I don't like my science teacher. He's racist towards animals. JUST BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T FOUND ANY SENTIENT ANIMALS DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY DON'T EXIST, AND ANIMALS DON'T KILL FOR FUN, MR. A!!! Sorry.

[Wolfy]

You know, just because they can't speak english(or french, or swedish, or german) doesn't mean they aren't sentient. Animals feel pain and joy, just as we do.(<--would be a sore spot for her.)

[DarkfireTaimatsu]

That's not why animals aren't sentient. It has to do with reasoning. The ability to think "If... then?"

[Wolfy]

Who says they don't? Can you prove that animals don't think of the consequences? Can you say, without a doubt, that that is the case?

[Daggertooth]

I think perhaps a discussion topic on animal intelligence would be in order to continue this line of thought. I could be wrong, but I think Ifll create a new thread in the generals anyway.

The difference between women and men is not only physical and chemical, it is also psychological. Women generally think differently then men. So I'll have to disagree with your teacher Dundee.

Now I am unsure how much of this is actually a self fulfillment prophesy generated by society. In Utah the girl scouts sell cookies, back brownies, learn to sew, and rarely ever go camping while the boy scouts go camping all the time. That would be an example of society generating the stereotypes.

But then I do recall taking a bunch of young women on a hike, It was only three miles, but there was a lot of complaining, basically a dislike for the outdoors and a fear ofcwellcbugs. Meanwhile I rarely get that from boys. I know its part of how the kids are raised, but is it all because of that?

Now that said, it doesnft justify sexism. Statistically women get paid less than men at the same rank of the same job. Therefs also the Glass ceiling they need to contend with. All of which I find wrong. Even back at the scouting example, the women staff and even the few female scout leaders were harassed by men and even some scouts.

Daggertooth

[Flagg]

While I certainly agree that sexism by its core definition is certainly wrong, and that the views of true the feminine and masculine have been terribly skewed by society, I do think there is more than a biological difference between the two genders.

First, let me explain my thoughts of sexism. By way of analogy, consider racism. If a red person will not give a job to a blue person because they're blue, if a pink person will not split a candy bar with a gray person because they're gray, if a purple person will not consider dating an orange person (too many carrots?), is that wrong? Absolutely! But is thinking a green person likes country music, because ALL green people like country music wrong? I do not think so. I think it's ignorant, sure, but if ignorance was morally wrong, then we'd have a whole lot of awful people out there. ; )
In the same way, thinking someone is better or worse because of their gender is wrong. But holding non-harmful stereotypes without acting on them (say, "Oh, I didn't think men liked sewing, but I'm glad you joined this class" is non-harmful, while "Oh, men don't like sewing, get out now" is quite harmful), then I see nothing morally wrong with that. Not saying other people were saying different, I just like to define myself.

OK, now, I think by and large the proper gender roles have largely been skewed by society. Men are supposed to be big tough guys who are entirely out of touch with their feelings, not to mention those of everyone else. They are also supposed to be sex-obsessed jerks who, chances are, just want to get in bed with you.
Women are supposed to be manipulative, exploitive, needy, demanding, and totally (think about that word, it is important) independent.
Neither of these views are directly encouraged from the "proper" role models, but it still seems to be what people pick up while growing up. Or maybe I'm totally off-base, and most people I've met are the exceptions.
When these two stereotypical archtypes meet, and to some extent that is happening more and more in relationships, nothing good comes out of it. Either the man takes all he can physically from the woman, the woman takes all she can emotionally (and maybe financially, later on in life) she can out of the man, or both. Then they both leave feeling bitter towards each other and the opposite gender at large.
In my opinion, the true roles would look something more like this. The man is the one who treasures, and the woman is the one who is treasured. It's like a circle, the man gives out his tender love and affection, lets the woman know that life will never get out of control, and even if it does, he is there to protect her. The woman responds to that affection with appreciation, and comes along side the man as his equal (always in worth, not always in role) and helps him. Then the man responds by giving out even more affection to the woman, and helping her with all she must accomplish, which causes the woman to respond with!...
Well, you get the idea. ; )

Personally, I think if a relationship looked like that, it would be inches from bliss all the time. But treating men and women as the same on every level but their biological make-up doesn't leave room for that. I'm not saying it's bad or that it can't work, I just personally think there is a better way.

[Stonestrike]

All I'm saying is people should exept people for who they are and that they shouldn't asume what a person is like from their gender. I am not masculine yet I am male. Why can't people understand that?

For example, I used to go to a school where even the teachers didn't exept me. Saying that men don't feel emotional pain and were always trying to get me into sports. It was a long time ago yet I am still bitter about it.

I'm kind of a shut-in now yet I am way more happy then I was when I was exposed to the many idiots and @$$holes out there.

[Momo]

You said it, Stonestrike. I'm probably the least masculine male I know. I have feelings, and strong ones at that. I'm not afraid to break down and cry when I feel pain or sorrow or grief, which I think is perfectly normal. Luckily, I never had any teachers on my case like that, and I don't like sports and would never acquiesce to anything of the sort.
I do hope that someday you can emerge from being a shut-in (of sorts), with the mental and emotional armor that you'll need to suffer the slings and arrows.

[Karuto]

You can't really complain about stereotypes because they become stereotypes for a reason. On some level, they are true. Most gay people do talk differently, most southerners are strongly religious-right, most men do hold a macho facade, and most women are more sensitive than men. These are generalizations that are mostly true and will always be stereotyped.

I mean, you can't blame others for assuming that someone falls under a certain stereotype or generalization, because that's what happens. I see people in my school who I would automatically and strongly categorize into a certain stereotype, like the jocks, mall-goths, and the "Look, we're soo different and punk because we're vegetarians and we care about the world and stuff" kids (could you tell I'm annoyed by them?). But my school actually had a survey and 98% said that they did not fall into a stereotype.

Oops on my part? No. I still follow what I think about them. If you fit the mold so well and nicely, why are you going to yell at others who tell you what stereotype they fall under?

Also, Americans tend to view themselves more as individuals than part of a collective, like Hector and his friends. But they fail to see the stereotype they truly are a part of.

And like I said, don't get angry because people sweep you into one big category. They're just doing it because it's mostly true.

[Alydos]

NOT mostly true, that it is true most of the time, there is a big difference there, don`t insult our friends here.
Karuto is extremely correct, otherwise, not being able to perceive patterns in a persons body language or speech is a sign of a defective mind. All people hold prejudices about things, because they are logical, they are reality.

[Daggertooth]

I disagree, many stereotypes are not only misleading and incorrect, they are downright insulting. It really doesnft take much to create a stereotype and often it only represents the loud minority and not near the population as a whole. Stereotypes like all Asians beat their kids, all Indians are lazy drunks, all Mexicans are dirty are not gmostly trueh in even the loosest sense.

Daggertooth

[Karuto]

Asians beat their kids? I just thought they were bad drivers.

That's a joke, by the way. And don't blame me for it, blame society.

Also, what's the difference if something is mostly true, and true most of the time? A pizza is mostly full of sauce, and full of sauce most of the time.

[Stonestrike]

The reason people continue stereotypes is because they don't want to be an outcast from their group. They're afraid to be different and thus stereotypes are born. If you choose to follow a stereotype you have people that agree with you without dismay. But if you follow a stereotype you are never truly yourself. I am girly, male, pagan, romantic and straight. I'm am the minority so I don't belong in any set group. But if everyone would just break out from the rest and be who they really are then we wouldn't have these stereotypes now would we? And most of the time isn't always.

[Alydos]

I apologize if it offends you that I disagree Stoneskin. They do not want to be an outcast from their friends, they do not want to be lonely, this is why cliques are formed. Cliques are not always made up of stereotypes. It is not because they want to join a stereotype, they don`t even acknowledge the stereotype exists.
Ignorant people will always misunderstand stereotypes, not using their own judgment; though some might be thankful for how poor it is, instead they use the judgment of rumors and preconceptions that they had. Which, by the way is different from what I was talking about, that is not natural in todays society, though a communal sharing is attributed to the human races longevity in the past. (apology to creationists, probably should have in advance.)

[Flagg]

I think stereotypes must be split into two different catagories in order to be properly judged. Quite frankly, some stereotypes are harmful, period. Consider Daggertooth's post. If I hold a stereotype that automatically puts some group lower than me in basic human worth (which can take a lot of different forms in all different social circles; a prep can devalue a goth for being a goth, a white working-class man can devalue a black working-class man for being black, or vice-versa).

But some stereotypes are, while certainly not universal guidelines (by definition, I suppose), they are not all together harmful, either. Indeed, if we come to each and every person we meet as an entirely new experience, starting from social scratch, then, well, that would be incredible if it could be pulled off well, but I doubt that it is possible.
Still, in the case of either type of stereotype (though more so with the harmful ones), I think it is important to have to ability to look beyond them. We should be able to see every person for who they are, not for who we make them in our minds.