Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    There is a string in the Parenting Notesfile   "Are boys different from
    girls" in which this topic is discussed at length. The gist of that 
    string is that most think there are no inate differences (other than
    physical) between boys and girls. I was one of the rare ones who dis-
    agreed but could not make my point that boys and girls have "software"
    differences which society then builds upon to create even further
    cultural conditioning differences.  To me, its common sense that
    physical differences illustrate that there MUST be gender related
    mental differences too. That is not to say that there won't be
    INDIVIDUALS who exhibit behavior usually associated with the opposite
    sex. I am talking about differences which show up in TRENDS of
    behavior.. such as "more men enjoy hunting than women".   I know the
    rebuttal is that my example shows the results of cultural conditioning....
    but IS it?  Those that insist that each example which is brought
    forward to illustrate inate differences are a result of cultural
    conditioning don't have proof either.  Does it really make sense
    that people who have different biological roles in procreation are
    EXACTLY the same mentally too?  As the article in Newsweek shows
    the argument goes on.  "Nature" made it possible to have children
    only if a male and female were involved in creating the child.  Even
    with artifical insemination or test tube babies both sexes are
    involved.  My point being that "Nature" designed the system so that
    most children have two parents of opposite sexes. There must be an
    inate advantage to the child in this or "the system wouldn't be 
    designed that way". Why not two parents of the same sex or asexual
    procreation?  Perhaps its because each sex has something DIFFERENT
    to contribute to the task of raising a child.  For those of you who
    are single parents or gay and raising a child I am NOT suggesting that
    there is anything wrong with the way your doing it, just that the
    "default" condition is usually with two parents of the opposite sex,
    which, may in a trend sort of way help illustrate that thare ARE 
    (IMO) inate differences (emotional/mental) between the sexes.  Yes,
    I do think there ARE basic differences between the sexes other than
    culturally induced differences.   Jeff

    
    	Well, knowing it was done by Time/Newsweek says it did draw
    	at least one conclusion I'll bet. That GUNs can only lead
    	to the child being violent, right? I've yet to see anything
    	come out of these people that didn't get on the GUN at the 
    	root of all evil theory.
    
    	Sorry, I know this is not the topic, just I'm sick of Time/
    	Newsweek's BS and often lies about guns and gunownership.
    
    	G_B

    re .1: I recall that particular discussion. My impression was not that
    people refused to believe that there might be a difference, simply that
    (a) it was difficult, if not impossible, to prove what the innate
    differences were (as opposed to the culturally-induced ones), and (b)
    even if it were true that "most boys are aggressive and most girls are
    passive", etc., parents don't raise "most boys and girls". They raise
    individuals, some of whom may exhibit the common traits of their sex,
    and some may not. It might be of interest to know that boys enjoy rougher,
    more active play than girls (to make up a factoid at random), but does
    that - should that - change the way you deal with a child who is
    playing so roughly that he or she is hurting someone? I don't think so.
    Does it mean that if a girl is playing quietly, you leave her alone,
    but if a boy is playing quietly you tell him, "Go out and make some
    noise"? Not in my book.
    
    I guess I'm just not comfortable with the idea of treating men and
    women as completely different species. Sure, there are differences,
    some innate and others environmentally induced, but I stil think we're
    more alike than we are different.
    
    -b

Re .1:

  >  involved.  My point being that "Nature" designed the system so that
  >  most children have two parents of opposite sexes. There must be an
  >  inate advantage to the child in this or "the system wouldn't be 
  >  designed that way". Why not two parents of the same sex or asexual
  >  procreation?  Perhaps its because each sex has something DIFFERENT
  >  to contribute to the task of raising a child.  For those of you who
  
  Jeff - 

       Interesting question.  Biologists will tell you that sexual reproduction
is a mechanism for increasing the rate at which a species can adapt to changes
in the environment.   With asexual reproduction,  genetic changes occur within
a biological strain only at the slow rate at which random genetic mutations 
occur, and any biologist will tell you that a mutation made at random will have
about a 99.99999999% chance of being fatal and the chance that the mutation
will help the strain survive and adapt to new conditions is one in billions.
But with sexual reproduction, where genes are mixed and matched, genetic
traits that enhance the survivability of a species can be bred into the strain
within a few generations, and traits that don't help can be bred out.  The
increased speed with which genetic variations can be introduced into an entire
strain with sexual reproduction give an improvement of many, many orders of
magnitude in the speed with which entire species can change and adapt.  Many
species enhance this further through competition among the males for the
privilege of mating with the females, who will mate exclusively with the
dominant male and none of the non-dominant males.  In fact biologists will
tell you that this advantage of sexual reproduction accounts for the fact that
today only single-cell organisms, fungi, molds, and other meaningless 
creatures spore and reproduce asexually.

       It may be true that both genders have something different to 
contribute to the raising of a child, but the phenomenon where the male
sticks around and helps the female raise their offspring is a fairly
recent thing ("recent" being on an evolutionary time scale, of course,
meaning millions of years) exhibited only in higher-order organisms.

       This all assumes, of course, that you buy the theory of evolution,
which you of course may not.


Re .2:

       G_B:

       I don't remember the article saying anything specific about guns
except that boys like to play with toy ones more than girls, and even if
you keep toy guns away from boys, they'll use sticks or other objects
as "shooters" and pretend to shoot people with them more than girls do.
(Behavior pattern in this case observed without exploring the cause 
behind it or making judgemental observations therefrom).

>    	Sorry, I know this is not the topic, just I'm sick of Time/
>    	Newsweek's BS and often lies about guns and gunownership.
 


	me too

	   
	kits

    .3  I thought your reply in .3 was well thought out. Thank you for the
    logic behind sexual reproduction.  It makes sense to me... if there is
    anything "Nature wants" its survival of the fittest, and if sexual
    reproduction enhances that it sure explains some of the advantages.
    
    As far as each partner in a marriage contributing to the raising of a
    child is concerned I have found as a relatively new father that having
    my wife to bounce child raising ideas off of and talk problems over
    with regarding raising our son is a BIG advantage.  She has strengths
    and weakness and I have the same.  When one has lost perspective or
    is caught in a problem in which ones' weaknesses are a problem, 
    usually the other parent comes through.  I really admire the single
    parents... they have their hands full without the advantage of a spouse
    to gain perspective and help from. 
    
    I bought the Newsweek and will read the article about boys differences
    vs. girls tonight.
    
    .2 thank you for another angle on the Parenting String on the
    differences.  I have no argument with the points/values you raised.
    Perhaps all I could hear in the other string was the people trying to
    say that "there are no differences, and one must raise unisex kids"
    when in fact that was not all they were saying.   Jeff
    

          Re: adaptation
      It appears that adaptation also plays a role in the nurture side
    of the equation. From parents to peer groups we reward sameness
    and discourage difference. That appears to be contrary to the concept
    of increasing the gene-pool size. Somehow we are attracted to opposites
    within our "group". Culturally, the insecurity caused by our mortality 
    seems to lead us to a preference for the solace of a homogeneous
    group. I think we apply that in every bias from gender to race. We
    don't seem to be able to accept patterns of behavior without making
    them into stereotypes and ultimately prejudices. 
    
          Adaptation seems to be, at the same time, the greatest attribute
    of the human race, and the greatest challenge. Our ability to adapt
    makes us more viable as a species (like the cockroach?), but the
    process of catagorizing data when applied to people, fails. Then
    add the linear, sequential, deductive western mode of logic and
    you get a cloning of behavior from generation to generation. I don't
    see how we can not impart secondary and tertiary sex-role characteristics
    to our children while we still reel from the exagerated roles of the 
    post-war industrial revolution.   (glad i wore my boots today...)
                  
                                                           M...
                                                 

    re: .1  "more men enjoy hunting than women"
    
    	I think this could be an example of a cultural
    difference. I have never known a man who enjoyed hunting. 35 years ago
    I knew a man who shot pigeons, but for purely practical reasons - a way
    of making money in his spare time. Hunting is not part of the culture I
    grew up with, so I have never known anyone who enjoyed it. The Greek
    deity for hunting was Diana.
    
    	Based on similar cultural differences I could assert (from personal
    acquaintances only) that "more men enjoy theft than women" or "more women
    enjoy sleeping around than men". How does this match your culture?

    re .8   I have noticed the same things... "more men enjoy sleeping
    around than women, and more men enjoy theft than women".  As far as
    hunting goes... I go camping alot and I don't think I have ever seen
    a woman hunting... its "always" men I notice.  I assume they enjoy it
    because its a voluntary activity.  Aspects of hunting appeal to me..
    that is, the hunt... but not the kill part.  Is that my software
    showing through, (the urge to be a predator which is tempered by
    not wanting to kill)?  My bottom line argument as to boys and girls
    having different "software" still fall back on the theory that since
    boys and girls have physical differences doesn't it follow that there
    are also SOME innate mental differences too?  How can a creature
    (people) be physically different structurally but not possess some
    different mental differences which "drive" the physical differences?
    Jeff

.6 

Intuitively, I think you are correct, and, so what if you are wrong...  I think
it takes different perspectives for a proper learning experience - parenting is
a learning experience for both parents and their offspring.

Do you have an agenda for your son?  Are your ambitions for your son the same
as your wife's?  As your son evolves is he exhibiting you or your wife's
"characteristics"?  What best part of you do you wish your son to inherit?
What traits has he seemed to pick up on his own?  Good discussion for you and 
your family by the way...  As you think of the answers to these questions, 
project them out to see if they would fall into what is now considered "proper"
for all of humankind.  Now, what if you and your wife had had a daughter?  What
would be different?

Look forward to your answers!