Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    
    Please, no blasting.  I'm doing the best I can with a clumsy keyboard
    and screen.
    

>   o Where are Men coming from?
    
    I think they're coming from a space where there was a "standard" role -
    a role that helped them feel empowered, powerful, and valued in the
    culture.  Now?  Now the landscape seems to have suddenly changed.  And
    at the same time they are encouraged to come to terms with who they
    FULLY are - the positive (getting-things-done, risk-taking,
    going-against-the-flow, overwhelming, trailblazing) and the negative
    (greed, violence, anger, frustration) sides BOTH (note not all men have
    all characteristics I just described), the universe tells them they are
    wrong for being the same people their fathers and grandfathers were. 
    And tells them to reveal vulnerable facets of themselves they may have
    learned all their lives to hide.  Men are coming from a place of
    long-buried need, in a world where it seems only others' needs matter
    (or are valid).  It must be frustrating, infuriating, and heartbreaking
    to seek validation where it was before and find none, and know
    validation exists beyond if you can only overcome ingrained protective
    patterns.

>   o Where are Women coming from?
    
    Women are coming out from pain/containment.  Anger is often the one way 
    to break out of this space, and many women who are outspoken and may
    seem seditious are fortunate to be able to express what other women may
    still bury.  Historically, women were not valued for who they were, but
    for what they did.  As women seek validation and fair achievement/value
    for WHO they are, this seems to detract from the value this society
    once placed on men.  Some women have powers and skills that were often
    labeled "weakness" (the skill/need for connection, for
    intuition/sensitivity, need to caretake, etc....), and many women are
    striving to have these skills branded in a more positive light.

>   o How are Men and Women complementary to one another? 
    
    I feel that men and women combine from at *least* minorly polarized
    spaces.  Men and women can often create a place of comfort and
    sustenance for one another (love), and seem to complement one another
    in the weakest spaces.  Ideally, they encourage one another to try
    spaces in which they may not be comfortable - As men can grow more
    comfortable with emotions, so may women come to be more comfortable
    with power and anger.  (and, of course, men and men, and women and
    women, can also come to love one another and create these spaces....)

>   o Must/Should Men and Women (or other distinct classes of people) be
>     segregated in order to come to terms with diversity?
    
    In some cases, I've found women-only space to be very supportive and
    sustaining (in spoken and unspoken ways).  I find there's more room to
    be completely myself (flaws and all) in a room that is solely populated
    by women.  I've found men-mostly space to be to some degree
    frightening, and to some degree empowering.  I find that I guard myself
    more closely, have a heightened sensitivity to insult/offense, and yet
    find that those facets of myself that women find discomforting have
    more free rein in this space.  
    
    I suspect that there is room for personal growth and insight in
    women-only, men-only and mixed spaces.  All of the courses/seminars
    I've taken have been mixed space - and the ability for BOTH men and
    women to doff their protective armor and be *human*, sharing the
    exploration of what it truly MEANS to be human, is humbling and
    connecting for both genders.
    
    -Jody

    RE .1
    
    The 1st part men was good.
    
    
    Steve

    >I think they're coming from a space where...
    
    Jody, when I first read that, I thought you going to tell us that men
    came from Outer Space.  :-)
    
    -- Mike

    Men seem (in general) to be VERY unwilling to share vulnerabilities
    with other men.  To reveal any type of weakness is 'unmanly', at least
    that is what I see in the men I attempt to relate to.   Also, to reveal
    emotions other than anger to other men seems to be considered
    'unmanly'.  As a result of my perception (outlined above) I find it
    difficult to develop 'meaningful' relationships with other men.  
    
    Jeff

 I applaud Jody for making the effort to turn this into a worthwhile discussion.
Nice job!
 
 I'll try to contribute when I can find a few minutes...

     I look forward to reading other responses to these questions...  I find
     these questions extremely challenging! As usual, Jody has "paved the
     way".  Many thanks to her and anyone else who chooses to get involved.
     I can't really say that I am satisfied with my answers but here's my
     first pass...

   o Must/Should Men and Women (or other distinct classes of people) be
     segregated in order to come to terms with diversity?

     I was hoping that people would answer this with a resounding NO!  I don't
     want to believe that segregation is necessary "for BOTH men and women to 
     doff their protective armor and be *human*", however, Jody and Laura say
     they have both gained benefit from that particular environment due to
     (my interpretation) the allayment of Fear...  Also, I suspect the men who
     attended the Sterling Men's Workshop as well had to displace a certain Fear
     in order to accomplish the "journey".  All military basic training is 
     geared to dealing with Fear.  I think that how we deal with Fear determines
     whether or not we become/stay a "victim".  On the whole, I don't think Men
     and Women share the same Fears but we all must become cognizant of each
     others Fear.  For true insight to occur,  mixed company is required (in my
     book).  

   o How are Men and Women complementary to one another? 

     The ultimate complementary fact is that it takes a male and a female to
     create life...  I wonder what the Grand Order Designer had in mind when
     setting up this scheme?  And what place do non-heterosexuals hold?

     Men are solitary trying to get "connected".  Women are "connected" but
     try to become solitary.

   o Where are Men coming from?

     I Fear that someone will ask me "what are _my_ Fears"...

     I have to disagree with Jody about Men being "risk-taking" because Men
     tend to rationalize away their Fears (at least I think I do) so that the
     so-called "risk" goes away.  Women are the "risk-takers" because their
     role in the process of producing a new life may require that they give up
     their own.

   o Where are Women coming from?

     From listening to Women it seems their Fear of being brutalized by Men
     is paramount.  

    
    segregating ones self to "come to terms with diversity" sounds like
    a clumsy oxymoron to me. 
    
    if one "wants to come to terms" with something, one simply confronts
    it.

    The notion that segregation is either unnecessary or harmful requires
    that men and women (or, if you prefer, masculinity and feminity) be
    essentially the same.  Since the body of evidence, already huge and
    growing, is that this is not so it follows that segregated workshops
    whereby people become, presumeable, more comfortable and confident in
    who *they* are, makes a great deal of sense.  Since who you are
    includes (may be, even revolves around) your gender identity it is
    logical that you come to terms with that first, which then enables you
    to approach your 'humanity'.  To do it the other way around is putting
    the cart before the horse.

>    if one "wants to come to terms" with something, one simply confronts
>    it.

 It's tempting to agree with you, Bob, but I think that confronting problems
only works for people who have a strong sense of self and of their ability to
effect change. For people who are extremely meek and who lack confidence the
idea of confronting anything may paralyze them with fear. I think that perhaps
segregation can reinforce a sense of self and self-worth and power, and then
confronting the issue of diversity can be more effective.

 From listening to women, it's obvious that there is a completely different
mindset at work. First of all, many of them seem to feel powerless- as if they
are slaves to their environment. And many men seem to feel they have at least
some limited power. So it sounds to me like you are attempting to work the
solution within the male paradigm (apologies for the overused phraseology, but
it fits.) I think we have to be more general than this, and allow people 
alternative paths to find their solution. We're not all square pegs. Maybe
part of acknowledging diversity is recognizing that no one solution will work for
all...

    The following is from Saturday's ABOUT PEOPLE (The Associated Press) column 
    in the local newspaper.  It caught my eye as it is so germane to this
    discussion...

       DIGNITY: It was a simple question from a teacher of mostly poor, black
       children, the last question to actor SIDNEY POITIER during his tribute
       at the Virginia Festival of American Film in Charlottesville.
        The answer brought Poitier back to his boyhood, and the audience to 
       its feet when he finished answering Thursday night.
        "Where does that dignity come from?" asked the teacher who did not 
       identify herself.
        Poitier, 65, said it didn't come from this country.
        "I grew up in the Caribbean and had a chance to develop a sense of
       self before the onslaught," Poitier said, referring to the racial
       prejudice he encountered when coming to America in 1944 as a
       16-year-old.
        His parents were farmers in a place where blacks were in the majority.
        "I had the circumstance to develop a feeling of self without having to
       deal with racism that early," he said.  "I felt good about myself, so
       I was able to survive without too much damage."
        If he had been raised in this country, where people of his age and
       race were constantly told by society that they were inferior, "I don't
       know if I would have had the strength to succeed."
        The work necessary to "undo" the wounds of racism is enormous, Poitier
       said.

    
    
    I would tend to agree on needing the safe places of only one sex
    present to gain a sense of ones self.  Once that sense of self
    is attained and truly believed in, integration will only serve
    to enhance that sense of self.  However, if one does not have
    a sense of self and is thrown into an integrated environment, it
    only serves to increase the amount of things to deal with which
    could cause more negative feelings to surface.
    
    On the subject of where are  men coming from.  From my experiences
    with men, they seem to be quite confused about life in general.
    More so on just what role they are now expected to play in 
    society but specifically with respect to families.  Where once
    they were expected to be the sole support and not have to take
    an active part in the emotional/physical work of raising kids,
    they are now faced with a choice which is more often than not
    a necessity for them to be both a financial supporter and
    an emotional and physical supporter.  
    
    Men are having to live/work with women who are bringing home
    nearly equal amounts and sometimes more money than they.  This
    I believe is a major issue as men tend to identify themselves
    first with what they do for a living.  
    
    Social roles are changing and at such a rapid pace.  It's
    scarey to see the rules change.  Even more so when you have
    no idea of just what the rules are at any given moment in time.
    
    
    As for where women are coming from, I think it is out of the
    old and into the new.  However, with this change, there is
    a growing number of women who resent the fact that now not
    only do they still have to do the majority of the domestic
    work, but they are asked (or in some cases economically
    required) to work a full 8 hour day outside of the house.
    It is also true that there is an increasing reason to
    be scared for ones life in ordinary situations where men
    simply do not have to face that fear.  That fear also
    trickles down to the children.  Afterall, if a women is
    afraid to walk by herself at night, then she will most 
    likely convey those fears to her children.
    
    What I see that really bothers me is that a large
    minority of men feel threatened by women where that
    threat was until recently non-existant.  In feeling
    that threat, they need to find nonviolent positive
    ways to work through the fear.  From my experience,
    alot of guys I've met are very intimidated by my
    professional choice and the amount of money I make.
    To me it is a part of who I am, but not the major
    thing involved so I just don't understand how they
    could be intimidated by it.  I don't look at men
    and see them for what they do for a living and
    how much they take home.  I see them for the person
    they are and what's in their hearts.  At the moment
    I'm looking for someone who wants to share my life
    and challenge me to grow with him.  I know he's out
    there, but just hasn't shown himself to me yet.  
    This is a major change that men are having to
    deal with.  With the majority of women working
    able to support themselves, the need to get married
    and have the man support them has all but disappeared.
    Now the needs to merge are more on personal growth
    together as an equal partnership vs a lopsided
    support system.  One more thing for men to have
    to change along with.
    
    
    What I really would like to see change is this laying
    blame on each sex.  If we continue to do this, we are
    never going to be in harmony with each other.  
    
    Michele

    re:.8
    
    That evidence is really just fictitious work of male chauvinists.
    
    The heterosexual white male patriarchy has you brainwashed!
    
    
    Praise the goddess!

    I've read that if a man gets to age 40 without getting married, it
    is a very good chance he'll never get married.

    why is that?

    is it because they are so wise by that age, or it it because they
    lost the desire to do it, or is it because they dont know how to play
    the dating game as well as the younger men, or is it because if you
    have not got married 40, then you dont want to anyway?

    /Nasser
    

>    why is that?
Good luck?? :-) 

>    lost the desire to do it, or is it because they dont know how to play
>    the dating game as well as the younger men, or is it because if you

Or the number of people available has decreased quite a bit...
Of that number, the number you actually encounter is small...
Of THAT number, the number who would say 'yes' can be miniscule :-) :-)

-Joe    

> 
>     I've read that if a man gets to age 40 without getting married, it
>     is a very good chance he'll never get married.
> 
>     why is that?

    
    From my observations, I would guess that this is because by the 
    time you reach that age, you'll be too set in your ways to make the 
    necessary changes in your life to accomdate someone (this works 
    from both sides).  To make a long-term commitment work requires
    changes and sacrifices on both sides.  It's not that there are 
    no compatible people out there, it's just that each person 
    will have some specific idea of who they're looking for... 
    too specific.  I don't think all people are like that, but
    many are... you're as young as you feel!
    
    Just a hunch... I'm only 28 though... and definitely not an expert 
    at this! (but who is really?)
    
    /Mitch.
    

.13>                            -< been converted? >-
    
    Does being nagged into submission count?

    re.14 Somebody (W C Fields?) once said that single men knew more
    about women than married men - if they didn't, they'd be married
    too! ;-)

    re .19, it's only the single men who have been womanizers who know more
    about women than married men.  :-)  (or maybe I should just say the
    experienced ones...)   :-)
    
    re .16, yes, I think that's it.  The older single people get the more
    used they become to not having to compromise about things.  People in
    their early 20's are more willing to make changes to accommodate others
    since they're not really sure how they want to live anyway.
    
    Lorna
    

    I think its because if you havn't found and married someone by 40 or so
    its because your life style is not conducive to attracting and keeping
    a partner.  By 40 you have lived long enough for the odds to have
    worked toward marriage IF your living in a way which encourages
    marriage.  There are exceptions of course.  Also, you tend to be set
    in your ways which maintains that life style.
    
    Jeff
    

    .21
    > I think its because if you havn't found and married someone by 40 or so
    >its because your life style is not conducive to attracting and
    >keeping a partner. 
    
    iam not sure i agree, it should be the other way round, for example
    when you are a single dude, you go to the frozen section of the
    supermarket, right?, and all the people who hang around the frozen
    sections are most likely single people too, so you get to meet them
    that way. this is a good example to show that a life style of the
    single people is not the reason for it, it must be something else
    more deep than that?

    for instance, the other day I almost met a realy nice woman over the 
    frozen vegg'y section, only to find she was not really interested in 
    veggy's at all, she was just passing by from the meat dept. to the eggs 
    section ;-(
    
    so, woot do you think ?

    /nasser

    re .22, I think your lifestyle is not conducive to attracting a
    partner.  :-)
    
    Lorna
    

    Single dudes, Nasser, do not always go to the frozen-food section.  :-)
    
    Best friend I ever had was single all his life, and I can't recall ever
    having visited the frozen-food aisle when we went shopping.  He was
    also the best cook I ever knew, and I'm eternally grateful to him for
    teaching me that real food tastes better than that frozen stuff.  :-)
    
    -dick

    this is really a dilemma, i mean a single dude cant cook by definition 
    (unless you consider boiling eggs cooking), so he must go to the frozen 
    section, and it seems you guys think the frozen section is not the best 
    place to meet that special single women, right? then what does the guy 
    suppose to do?    STARVE HIMSELF TO DEATH !!!

    this is getting more complicated that i thought ...

    however not all is lost, going to the laundry machine facilities is 
    always another option, but the problem there is that one can at most do 
    his laundry only once a week, but one needs to eat every day, so that is 
    why i think the frozen section has better chances for eminent  success.

    
    /nasser

    But what kind of woman do you expect to find in the frozen food
    section?  You kind of have to assume she can't cook either...
    
    You missed an opportunity with that other woman: probably should have
    invited her home for breakfast - HAM & EGGS...

    .26
    
    the problem is that i dont eat meat and ham, at least not red meat, iam 
    sort of a veggy my self too.
    
    

    I'm not gonna touch that one...

    .22:  Perhaps people who spend so much time in the frozen food section
    have trouble warming up to a relationship?
    
    :-)
    
    ed

 <groan>

    A friend of mine owns a couple of automats (coin operated laundromats
    with misc other machines) in Maine. He needed ways to generate more
    business so he started making Wednesday nights "Singles Night" at his
    places. He met his SO at one, using the line that she had awesome
    undies.....anyway, the laundromats rock on Wednesdays and people bring 
    beer and munchies and picnic baskets and their laundry. I guess they
    have a great time and meet a lot of new people. It's become so populsr
    that he's had to hire bouncers to keep kids out and to move people
    along once their laundry is done. Alot of people separate whites, PP,
    darks, delicates etc, and delay starts so they can dry a load while a
    load finishes in the washer...takes about 3 hours but it's hysterical
    to listen to how BVDs and Fruit of the Looms are now 'name brands' and
    Lady Grace and Victoria's Secret are like commonplace at the
    "undiewash".......needless to say...he's making a bundle.
    
    	Ken 

    ref .31

    that sounds like a fun laundry room.

    the laundry room facilitates i frequent is really a very boring one,
    it is not like in the movies at all, iam really thinking of changing it 
    and to go the one across the street instead, but this one have bigger 
    and better machines, this is the issues iam having to decide on.

    /nasser

So Steve, with regard to your 840.160 reply of

"As host-moderator of this conference, I will state once again that it is my
belief that restricting participation in a conference or topic to any select
set of individuals is a violation of corporate policy and will not permit
such in any conferences I moderate.  I also believe that it is a self-defeating
notion which serves only to increase the isolation and separatism which is
tearing our society apart."

it would seem that your response to the question:

   o Must/Should Men and Women (or other distinct classes of people) be
     segregated in order to come to terms with diversity?

must be a resounding NO as well!

Your comments would be appreciated...

Re: .34

I don't know about "resounding", but I do believe that, overall, segregation
as a tool is bad.  I'm aware that "safe spaces" make it easier for some to
speak their mind, but what that does is make it only possible for them to
do so in such safe spaces.  The real world is not safe.

My ideal situation would be to have a "mixed" audience where politeness
and respect is encouraged/enforced and where each group is allowed to hear
the views and opinions of the other.    You may not like what you hear, you
may not be open to the ideas and opinions different from your own, but at least
you're aware of what is being said, rather than being able to pretend that
these other opinions don't exist since they are not expressed where you can
hear them.

My personal view is that those who shout the loudest in favor of shutting
out "evil influences" are those whose minds are the most closed already.

				Steve

    re .35
    
>as a tool is bad.  I'm aware that "safe spaces" make it easier for some to
>speak their mind, but what that does is make it only possible for them to
    
    When you teach a child to swim do you throw them alone into the ocean
    or help them first in the shallow end of the pool?

Re: .36

You're implying that the "safety" of safe spaces is gradually lifted, as
a child is encouraged to swim in deeper waters.  How does that happen in
a separatist society?

				Steve

    re .37
    
    An occasional safe space does not a separatist society make.
    
    If you want men to try and articulate what is very, very hard to
    understand then you have to give them some latitude while they work
    their way around it, gradually knocking off the rough edges in the
    process.  Allowing ill-informed, damaging and generally unwelcome
    interference from those with an irrelevant axe to grind is guaranteed
    to stop this process before it ever has a chance to really get going.

Re: .38

Well, that's the great thing about NOTES, isn't it?  You can type anything
you want, and nobody stops you from typing, nobody even sees what you're
writing until you push the key to actually enter the note.  Sounds safe to
me, and that seems to be responsible for a lot of people saying things here
they'd never say face-to-face to another person.

			Steve

    When the things some men are trying so hard to articulate turn out to
    be the same old workplace biases (about the worth of non-white-male
    individuals in the work force,) someone else is likely to articulate 
    an objection.  It's a touchy subject.
    
    It's rather naive, in my opinion, for anyone to expect that such a
    discussion is a 'sensitivity' issue for some men (to be able to voice
    biases against others in the workplace in a notesfile that takes place
    where these individual men and those being discussed are employed.)

    As usual, you've missed the point.  The topic was never about being
    able to voice biases.  It was about feelings and they are, for a great
    many men, very difficult to articulate.  So, a reasonable person (that
    excludes you, obviously) will understand that the first few times
    around they won't necessarily come out right.  They will need to be
    practisd and polished.  Not exploded.
    
    Oh, and Steve, your contention that people are protected by the feeble
    anonymity of the screen is nonsense and you know it.  By participating
    in notes you actually expose yourself to the whole corporation.

    RE: .41  David
    
    > As usual, you've missed the point.  The topic was never about being
    > able to voice biases.
    
    The basenote is missing (and has been since the topic first started,)
    as mentioned before.  The guidelines for discussion are, thus, missing.
    
    > It was about feelings and they are, for a great
    > many men, very difficult to articulate.  So, a reasonable person (that
    > excludes you, obviously) will understand that the first few times
    > around they won't necessarily come out right. 
    
    You certainly have no trouble expressing your boundless hostility,
    of course, so I suppose you think these other men need your help
    and protection.  I disagree.  I think they know how to conduct
    conversations for themselves (even if someone objects to something
    they've written.)
    
    Someone did object to something written.  It wasn't a big deal.
    (Objections happen in notes all the time - it's the nature of
    the medium.)  Evidently, you'll never recover from it, though.

    re:.35
    
    We disagree on some issues, Steve, but I really admire the way you
    think and reason regarding this male/female segregation issue.

    re: .36
>    When you teach a child to swim do you throw them alone into the ocean
>    or help them first in the shallow end of the pool?
    
    	An interesting analogy. A cousin of mine started teaching her
    2-month old daughter to swim. At that age there isn't a shallow end.
    The child was swimming before she was walking.
    
    	Maybe if you avoid a shallow end (segregation, safe spaces) from an
    early enough age you will never need them?

    re .44
    
    I assume that the todler in question wasn't simply thrown into the
    water and left to cope?  In which case my analogy stands.

>   o Where are Men coming from?

I can't speak for all men, but I am coming from a place where I have been 
attacked for having feelings, showing feelings and talking in anything but 
straightforward, rational "manly" patterns.

>   o Where are Women coming from?

I have no idea.

>   o How are Men and Women complementary to one another? 

See previous answer.

>   o Must/Should Men and Women (or other distinct classes of people) be
>     segregated in order to come to terms with diversity?

I think short retreats into segregated space are valuable, although it has 
little to do with diversity.  In general, most cultures support various kinds
of retreat (prayer, isolation, fasting, silence, wilderness) as a way of 
gaining insights we can't reach in our everyday society.  In particular, many
men these days seem to find it easier to get in touch with their feelings 
and their deeper nature in small groups of supportive men.

I have not spent much time in men-only groups, but it is enough to feel an
entirely different atmosphere.  This atmosphere changes when there is a
non-supportive man around.  It also changes when there is a woman 
present, regardless of how supportive she may be.  

I was also once in a serious group consisting of myself and several women.  The
atmosphere really changed when another man joined us.  The two of us and the
women produced a competitive energy that would not have been there if there 
was only one man in the group.  

I find these effects strange (and even a little distressing) but I have felt 
them and heard and read similar reports from others.  These effects tell me
something about myself.  I would not have this awareness if I spent all my time
in correctly mixed gender groups.

.44>    Maybe if you avoid a shallow end (segregation, safe spaces) from an
>    early enough age you will never need them?

Interesting hypothesis, but I know I am already past that hypothetical age.

.42>    Someone did object to something written.  It wasn't a big deal.
>    (Objections happen in notes all the time - it's the nature of
>    the medium.)

True, which is why notes would need an additional level of respect and 
tolerance before it could be the kind of safe space I and others have talked 
about.  I think those of us looking for safe space must look elsewhere.

.39> Sounds safe to me

This is not the kind of safety I am talking about.  Notes are safe in that 
nobody can immediately punch me out, but I have not been threatened in a 
social conversation these thirty years.  So in that very limited sense, all
my conversations are safe.

The kind of safety and support I am talking about is more subtle.  It would 
mean that I could produce some confused, messy, half-formed feelings and my
listeners would help me to get a handle on them.  In return I would do the
same for them.  My experience is that the conversation changes when this 
level of support is present.

    re: .45
    	Well, actually, the mother was a biology lecturer at an Australian
    university, and was prepared to test the theory that babies could swim
    from birth. I doubt she would have left the baby to drown, but she was
    interested to see how little assistance would be needed. The answer is
    "remarkably little".
    
    	Incidentally, the "baby" is now a 30 year old teacher at a school
    in New Zealand.
    
    	The analogy is still valid, though. If you start early enough then
    things that adults regard as difficult (like swimming) may be easier
    than things that adults regard as easy (like walking). I am much too
    old to learn anything.

    RE .46
    
    Well put, Wally.  Thank you.
    
    -dick

    re .47, yes, but does she still like to swim?
    
    Lorna
    

    	She teaches swimming (amongst other things). It sort of runs in the
    family. Her mother represented her country at swimming, and her
    great-uncle on her father's side could still swim lengths of an Olympic
    size pool at the age of 92.  Not that this has anything to do with the
    topic, but since you asked...