Conference turris::womannotes-v1

RE: 39.0

>Women have a different culture than men. They have their own art, music,
>literature, language, customs, values, everything it takes to make a
>culture. 

Did I miss out on something?  I don't participate in this culture.  I don't
listen to/read/look at "women's" music/literature/art.  Are they for women
only or do they just point out some of the problems of women (like black
music)?  And as to *language*, give me one example of words that men
don't understand.

I'd say women live in the same culture as men (where women think it's their
job to stay home with the kids, there's usually men who think the same).

...Karen

    maybe I'm missing something...but...as in, for example, black culture,
    which indeed does have its own music, language, etc. I agree with
    .0 that their is a subculture of woman's music, art..etc..
    
    go to a bruce springsteen concert....99% white
    blacks all go to see other musicians....none of whom I know.
    though there will be a lot of white women and men at the same
    concerts...there are a number of woman musicians/composers that,
    apparently, mostly woman appreciate.......joan armatradin? (sorry
    about the spelling)....I attended her concert in providence last
    year and it was 85% female...the males were probably dragged there
    as dates....woman poets.....whom, it seems, only other woman read/
    appreciate.
    
    	re.1 yes..., you did miss something...and you are still missing
    it. I suggest you read alice walker or any of the other woman poets/
    authors who are part of the subculture. they say a lot of interesting
    and intelligent things that I fail to find in the words of men,
    for the most part.
    	I'm a male...and certainly not proud of it, and though I'm not
    totally familiar with their works, my female companion/inspiration/
    lover is always quoting from her vast collection of female sub-culture
    mediia and i'm forever realizing that most men would not have said
    the same or even thought it......too often...myself included.
    
    	how about this.....once a woman latches onto a man...neither
    heaven or hell could possibly make this woman be unfaithfull (in
    most cases)
    ....but men....out of sight, out of mind....
    	Of course....this does NOT apply to me....(in case my lover
    reads this) :-)
        does this not signify a cultural difference?
    
    

    Well, I suppose that you could lump all of us into a group called
    the Western Culture.  Or, you could then break us down into some
    unknown quantity of cultures.  It depends on you definition of culture.
    
    I can't figure out what name I would give to a culture comprised
    of people who are just like me.  Would it be the Lee Culture?  That
    may imply that it is for people whose name is Lee.  How about the
    Me culture?  Everyone is a me, so perhaps everyone would feel that
    they should be a member.  
    
    Why are we always trying to catagorize others?  If I cry when I'm
    in pain, am I out of the male culture?  Does it make me a member
    of the female culture, or am I now a member of the
    male-who-sometimes-cries group?  I have reddish hair.  Am I now
    a member of males-with-reddish-hair-who-sometimes-cry group?  We could
    go on for a long time, and, by the end, I would probably be the
    ONLY member, and the rest of the world population would each be
    a member of a single culture comprised of itself.
    
    I'd be very interested if someone would please COMPLETELY define
    the parameters of either of the base-notes culture catagories.
    
    GOOD LUCK     8^)
                 
    Lee

>   	how about this.....once a woman latches onto a man...neither
>   heaven or hell could possibly make this woman be unfaithfull (in
>   most cases)
>   ....but men....out of sight, out of mind....

>   does this not signify a cultural difference?
        
        Maybe it would, if it were true.  However, it's not even
        close, which makes it just a typically meaningless line of
        poetry.  Anyone who thinks all women are faithful and all
        men aren't is blind in more than just the strictly physical
        sense of the word.
        
        In other words: no, it doesn't signify a cultural difference.
        It signifies bad poetry... which is universal.
        
        In general, you can't say women are a separate culture because
        some women like things some (or even most) men don't.  Our
        culture is a blend of lots of different people who do things
        lots of different ways.  There are always going to be subgroups
        of that culture which happen to like to do the same things
        the same way, like a sorority/fraternity or a social club
        (assuming there's a difference!).  They're not separate
        cultures... and even "subculture" is overstating things a
        bit in most cases.
        
        As for .2's "I'm a male...and certainly not proud of it",
        it's tempting to think that reproducing just that phrase
        is "taking it out of context"... except that it has no obvious
        relation to the context in which it was, so it seems only
        reasonable to take it at face value.  Why aren't you proud
        of it?  I am.  You're in sad shape if you can't be proud
        of what you are.  You don't have to be proud of what *other*
        men have done and often continue to do, but if you can't
        be proud of yourself, it's time to do something about it...
        
        	/dave

        I like .3.
        
        One of the major problems this world has is labels.  "We
        can't get along with *them* 'cause they're **women**", "We
        can't get along with *them* 'cause they're **Communists**",
        "We can't get along with them 'cause they're ***Republicans***",
        "We can't get along with them 'cause they're ****Engineers****".
        
        Yet we find, over and over again, that when people meet,
        one on one, without labels, they *do* get along.  Even if
        they sometimes disagree, and even argue about it... they
        can do it as friends, not as enemies.  And you can change
        a friend's mind, if you try... you can *never* change an
        enemy's mind.
        
        Think about that really carefully before you go trying to
        create even *more* artificial labels for people.  Nobody
        fits any label... not if there's any meaningful definition
        attached to it.  And labels *without* meaningful definitions
        are even worse.  Labels aren't your friends, because they
        can't do anything but try to leave out people not perceived
        as fitting the label by those who define it.
        
        Labels make me angry.  Very angry.  Look how many have been
        killed, how much as been destroyed, because they weren't
        Christian (crusades, witch hunts, etc.), look at how many
        were killed because they weren't Aryan (Hitler), look at
        how many people have been killed, how much as been destroyed,
        thoughout history, because one government didn't like another's
        "label", or thought its own label belonged on more
        things/people.  Often governments which were otherwise
        peacefully coexisting.  What have labels ever done for *you*?
        
        	/dave

    I'm proud of what Iam.
    I'm not proud of men....and what they are.
    
    	many of them are arguments looking for places to occur.
    of course, not you...!
    	you may not agree with me....but that doesn't make my state-
    ment wrong. or, are you and god on social speaking terms? are
    you privy to data that the rest of us have been denied?
    	are there too many trees in your way, dave?
    
    i can't speak for women...but i can at least attempt to speak
    for men....men i've sat at tables with and talked with...men
    who tell me they believe in marriage and love their mate....
    men who, after telling me this....look at the next female that
    walks by and make lewd and lascivious comments.....or was I 
    on drugs at the time and it never really happened?
          actually, bute, it's men? like you who make me ashamed to
    call myself a man...men who think they have all the answers and
    who have decided that...whatever they think is RIGHT...and everyone
    else is just deluded or unthinking or a fool.
    	let me guess.....you're married...."settled down" and you have
    2 kids...maybe 3...and a house and 2 cars....how imaginative....
    how novel....it must be nice to be your own person.....do you
    have your grave site, too?
    
    	:-)  have a typical day!
    	
        

    I can't believe it....dave butenhof said something that I almost
    agree with!
    
    
    
    maybe there is a god!
    

    but does She agree with dave?

        .6 is totally disgusting, insulting, and has absolutely no
        relevance to what I said.  Or did you intend something radically
        different from what you said?
        
        First off, "bute" is not an acceptable variant of my name.
        People who use such mechanisms of "commentary" are generally
        low slimey creatures who wallow in filth... not at all my
        impression of you from other entries in this conference.
        Was .6 written by a different Sawyer maybe?
        
        Since you know very little about me, I don't know where you
        get off saying "it's men like you who make me ashamed to
        call myself a man".  Considering what my life is actually
        like, I'd say that's more of an insult to you than to me...
        but then, you seem to have decided to make a fool of yourself
        today.
        
        I'm married.  Basically, we gave up after several years
        of "when are you going to get married" and just went with
        it.  It ain't so bad.  In fact, it's just the same as when
        we were living together, aside from an Aunt who insists on
        sending mail to "Mr. and Mrs."... but then, if you'd bothered
        to read through this conference before getting insulting,
        you'd know that... and how I feel about it.
        
        Yep, we've got a house.  Not only that, we're working on
        designing a new and better one.  We've also got two cars,
        since my wife and I occasionally have commitments in different
        places at the same time, and (oh, no!) we're actually...
        about to replace one with a nice new sports car.  Oh, how
        bloody *terrible* I am!  I fail to see how either proves
        me to be anti-female even in any trivial way.  Whether you
        like *our* lifestyle is wholely irrelevant to this discussion,
        and to this conference.
        
        We don't have any children... mostly because we're having
        a bit of trouble figuring out how we can both work *and*
        both stay home and take care of the kid.  We'll work it out
        one of these years.
        
        Grave site?  Who the hell wants to be buried and take up
        nice land with a box full of a rotting corpse?  Pretty
        grotesque, if you ask me.  When I die the medical people'll
        take what's useful and whatever's left'll get burned up and
        scattered someplace nice, like up in the mountains (I've
        got a bit of a romantic inside me, I guess).
        
        And quite honestly, it's people with attitudes like yours
        which make me wish my starship was repaired so we could get
        the hell away from you once and for all before your hate
        and narrow-mindedness destroys everything.
        
        	/dave

I don't really believe that there is a spearate culture for women. I
    think there is a separate sub-culture in american (or western) society
    of women and some men who really like women/feminist poets, musicians,
    etc. this doens't make it a WOMEN's culture. Many women aren't
    particularly interested in same, or are bored by it, or don't like
    it -but are not less feminist, independant, intelligent, etc. I have
    read books like Home Before Dark, or the Women's Room for example,
    and tho I thought they were well written I had no desire to go out
    andread more of the same genre. I have also heard some "women's" music
    and poetry on PBS, and didn't have any great desire to try and go
    out and hear more. For all it's value and importance to a sub group
    of women the things .0 is talking about as "women's culture" don't
    really reach or speak to all women so really can't be thought of
    as a culture in the sense that you talk about a particular national
    or ethnic culture.
    
    Bonnie
                      

Now we're talking!

Bonnie, thank you for making a serious and intelligent reply that sticks to
the subject at hand.

Right, there's no separate culture for women. If there were, it would be
independent and sovereign, and we could look from at it the outside the way
Americans can look at French culture. But if you're outside the women's
culture it's very hard to see. That's what it means to be a subculture. Just
because it isn't very visible doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

And I think that even though women's culture doesn't appeal to all women,
and even though it includes some men it is still a women's culture. That's
my whole point. There is a subculture of this mainstream culture that we all
share which embodies values that we don't all share, in particular it values
women in a way the mainstream culture does not. That's why it has songs and
stories and poetry and art about women and what women like and don't like,
and what they want and what they do and how they work and play, and this
kind of stuff is missing, or at least different in the mainstream culture.

Don.

Here's an entry from Karen Sullivan from another note:

>My dictionary's definition of culture is:
>
>"Sociol. the sum total of ways of living built up by a group of human beings
>and transmitted from one generation to another."

I see women's culture performing exactly this function. There is a culture
which has existed for millenia which has put women's needs on an equal level
(at least) with those of men. One of the functions of women's music, poetry
etc. is to educate young people in that tradition. Even if your parents and
teachers don't tell you there's an alternative you can find out by going to
a women's poetry reading, concert, art show, or just by reading some of the
books that have been written through the ages by, about, and for women.

Don.

You might want to read Suzette Hayden Elkin's science fiction
novel, Native Toungues, for an interesting discussion of this theme.

Martin.

Perhaps the concept of reality (What a concept, Huh?) as opposed to 
culture or society might provide another view of the topic of "separate
cultures."  Anne Wilson Schaffe (sp?) in her book _Women's_Reality_ talks
about how her women patients (She is a psychologist)  have different
perceptions of their worlds than men do.  She talks about men feeling 
affirmed by the world they live in, while women often get messages that
they are crazy, bad, and/or dangerous (Not her exact words).  She also
talks about women (and men, rarely but sometimes) affirming women, helping
them to see the mad, bad and dangerous to know (as I was once describe for
some obscure reason) messages for what they are (propaganda).  There's a lot
more in this book not all of which applies to this topic.  So, back to the
reading list topic. . .  

Do women as a group (or even a majority of women) have common (and
different from men) perceptions of reality?  Sometimes yes and sometimes no.
I, too am closer to my spouse than to folks of my own gender.  And yet. 
And yet. . . she sees a world I don't sometimes, and she lives her life
accordingly, and is shaped accordingly.

-Byron

    How can you even suggest that there is a female culture and a male
    culture when they must work together to maintain the race?
    And how can you generalize about male and female? ( a woman will
    stick like glue or something like that) Isn't that the very type
    of attitude that reinforces those social beliefs in the psychological
    differences.
    
    Sue

    Re .10, Paul, I don't think it's appropriate to give your
    personal opinion of a person in a notesfile.  It would seem
    to me that if you contribute anything at all it should be
    your opinion of the subject being discussed.  I don't like
    the idea of you just reading through the file and then only
    contributing when you have the opportunity to run someone down.
    
    Lorna
    

    re .17:
    
    exactly, I've been guilty of .10's behavior, in a milder form (I
    think) I feel badly about it, and now believe that comments such
    as in .10 are more properly conveyed by MAIL.
    
    sm(all today)

    
    I'm not sure if this observation should go under the "Missing Children"
    topic (with it's discussion of parents) or under this topic about
    difference between men and women, or under "A Difference Which *Is*
    No Difference" but I'll put it here.
    
    Last weekend I went to Provincetown with a friend and her two month
    old daughter.  We spent almost two whole days going through all
    the shops in P-town.  During all this time she had her 2 month old
    daughter in one of those carriers that hang in front of the parent.
     As we walked around women of all ages, from teenagers to white
    haired older women, would come over and coo at the baby, and smile,
    and ask how old it was, what was it's name, say how "precious" it
    was, ask how much it weighed, tell us some anecdote about their
    child or grandchild, etc., etc.  There must have been about 50 women
    in all who stopped to talk and look at the baby.  In all that time
    only *one* man commented on the baby - a man we bought fudge from.
     All the other men in the street, in the shops, ignored it just
    as though it was another bag of souvenirs.  I wonder why?  I wonder
    if this means that even though most men are now putting a lot more
    into being parents to their own children, they still do not have
    as much interest or love of children in general as do women?
    
    I think the reason I even noticed this contrast is because of all
    the assertions made in Womannotes that there are no real differences
    between men and women - or if there are they are all caused by society
    rather than being innate.  I wonder why so many women are thrilled
    to see any baby and so many men could care less (unless it's theirs)?
    
    Personally, I usually reserve such enthusiasm for either kittens
    or my favorite male rock stars.
    
    
    Lorna
    

    re .19:
    
    good observation. I know it's true for me. My kid is the greatest
    thing in the world, all others are ho-hum. Before Chris was born,
    I didn't really care for kids at all. In fact, I was worried whether
    I would love the kid at all (but then expectant fathers worry about
    all sorts of crazy things, like whether it'll have two legs or not,
    etc).
    Maybe it's just the proverbial "maternal instinct" :-)
    
    But seriously, you may be on to something. After-all, marriage was
    supposedly invented so that the man would KNOW which kids were HIS.
    Most other male mammals in the wild will kill young'uns of his species.
    
    But really, I think it is more because girls are raised to love
    babies through dolls. Boys aren't. Human nature seems to be
    overwhelmingly NURTURE, not nature.
    
    sm

	    I love babies.  I've been discouraged from making a fuss
	over some J. Random Baby because it's not socially acceptable.
     	I've had parents look at me weirdly, threaten me, and even
	make unsubtle insinuations about me being a pervert.
	    I fail to see why this has been presented as a possible
	intrinsic difference, especially since it was accurately pre-
	sented as not a universal.  (Perhaps it was inspired by that
	silly Phil Donahue series? (-:))

	[Nit Department]

	> [M]arriage was supposedly invented so that the man would KNOW
	> which kids were HIS.

	    Close, but no banana.  Marriage existed in Europe before
	patrilinear/patriarchal trends came along.  There just wasn't
	the emphasis on fidelity that there is now.

	> Most other male mammals in the wild will kill young'uns of
	> his species.

	    Where did you hear that?
			<_Jym_>

    
    Re .21, I didn't present this as an intrinsic difference.  I presented
    it as an observation, and wondered if anybody had any comments.
     Maybe men are just afraid to show an interest in babies because
    it's not socially acceptable.  Maybe women feel they are supposed
    to show an interest in babies so they do.  As I said before, I get
    much more thrilled by coming upon a cat somewhere than I do a baby.
    
    Lorna
    

    On the PBS special on Jane Goodall watching chimps, they described
    some particularly disturbing incidents, which they would never had
    seen if they had only been watching chimps for a few years.  A mother
    chimp and her daughter would steal, kill, and eat other baby chimps.
    It had been discovered previously that chimps only eat meat they
    kill themselves.  That was the only mention of any chimps killing
    any babies.  Male chimps only killed other grown male chimps (while
    under observation).
    
    Mez

    Re male animals killing young
    In many species of mammals where there is a dominant male that
    breeds most or all of the females in a pack, tribe, what have you
    if a younger male displaces the dominant male he will kill
    all the nursing infants. This brings the female in to heat so 
    the new alpha male can breed her. This has been well documented
    in lions and gorillas for example. Some socio biologists have 
    suggested that this may be a reason why you often find violence
    by a step father or boy friend against a woman's children by a 
    previous relationship.
    
    Most carnivores that do not have packs show no species favoritism
    when they are looking for a meal. The main reason they don't
    attack their own species is 1. they maintain separate territories
    which they don't often leave. 2. An adult of the same species
    is usually too big to be considered prey.
    
    As far as human males and babies, I suspect that the apparent or
    real lack of interest in babies is for both the reasons mentioned
    previously, men are not brought up to be as baby conscious as
    women are (until recently how often did you find men at baby showers?)
    and because they are concerned that people may misinterpret their
    behavior (as being threatening for example) if they do.
    
    Bonnie

        When carrying my son in a Snuggli, I have been surprised at the
        number of teen-age boys who make eyes, coo, giggle or comment on
        him. More men comment on the baby when I'm carrying it than I'm
        used to when a woman does. It is still true that far more women
        admire the baby than men. 
        
        I'm not sure why the teen-aged boys seem more oriented towards
        babies either than I remember my contemporaries acting when I
        was a boy or than older men do. It may be part of the changing
        culture. 
        
        Personally, I've always been a baby person. I'm one of the
        atypical ones who flirt with passing babies and occasionally
        strike up a conversation with a mother, although usually only
        when my sons or wife are around. It is my experience that many
        women do not take being approached by strange men (and we all
        know I'm strange, right?). It seems "safer" if it is obvious
        that I'm attached and/or a father. It may be that something
        like this inhibits many men. 
        
        Ever since Brendan was very small it has seemed to me that
        single parenthood of infants is almost always "wasted" on women.
        :-) I mean you strap a baby on, go out in public and all these
        attractive young women start to approach you! :-)
        
        JimB.

        I've also noticed that I'm inhibited by the knowledge that
        a lot of people are very concerned about strangers approaching
        their children (and concerned with good enough reason that
        I'm also worried about encouraging the parents/children to
        interact with strangers).
        
        I almost always watch babies---and small children---when
        they're near.  They fastinate me.  Particularly little girls,
        for some reason (I think that's something I inherited from
        my father: my parents had three boys and no girls, and each
        of us was named "Kathy" until we were born), and of course
        parents tend to be especially nervous of strange men hanging
        around their little girls.
        
        I usually smile, and occasionally wave at the kid or make funny
        faces, etc.  Especially in close and relatively "safe"
        environments, like waiting on line at a supermarket checkout.
        But especially on a street, I would never actually approach to
        fuss over the baby.  I'd feel like I was making the parents
        nervous (even if I wasn't), and I'd be equally uncomfortable if
        I thought the approach of a stranger *didn't* make them at least
        a little nervous. 
        
        It's terrible that we live in a society where paranoia is
        a sane precaution... but that's pretty much the way it is,
        and unfortunately it seems to remain true that most of the
        really dangerous crazies in this society are men.
        
        Incidentally, I've also noticed that I'm *less* inhibited
        about such things when my wife is present.  It's quite odd,
        logically, but it *does* seem to make people less cautious.
        
        
        	/dave

    I've a feeling that this reverses as children mature.  Having an
    pre-teen child (or a teen child, for that matter) may elicit more
    response from males than females.  This could have something to
    do with parenting transitioning from touching/feeding/cleaning of
    a very dependent person to teaching/guiding/supporting a less dependent
    person.

    Maybe there is something to playing with dolls, as opposed to playing
    with other toys that causes the fascination with babies.  As a small
    child, I was the only girl in the entire neighborhood, so I played
    with the boys, and trucks, and trains, etc.
    
    Now babies leave me cold.  In fact, they make me very nervous,
    especially if given one to watch alone for awhile.  Like Lorna,
    I reserve the cooing for cats.  On the other hand, I like children 
    between the ages of about 6 and 12.
    
    Kathleen
    

I doubt if a weekend trip to Provincetown is a valid statistical sample.
I've seen something like the behavior Lorna reports, but not by a 50-to-1
ratio.

Ever since I've been working for DEC (8 years come September) I've worked
with mixed groups, i.e. men and women, and every once in a while one of the
women will get pregnant, take time off, and have a baby. Almost invariably
these new mothers bring their infants in to show them off to us, the
co-workers. The male co-workers rarely match the quantity or quality of coos
and gurgles of the female co-workers, but we do our part. It should be noted
that not all the female co-workers are equally enthusiastic about grabbing
up the swaddling babe. On the other hand, new fathers aren't quite as
evident in carrying around the new offspring and showing them off.

Don

    Re: .29
    
    Don, I thought your statement about not every woman being eager
    to coo and swadle the co-workers baby is quite appropriate.
                         
    I have been in several work situations which have been overbearing
    because the department has had to live everyday  of the pregnancy
    term and the details of the delivery. Then there is *the* day when
    baby is brought to the office. I for one think this is inappropriate.
    Proud parents are not the problem when they exercise some discretion.
    However, they forget that some people may not be as caught up in
    there joy as they are and it could be for a myriad of reasons.
    
    I am not anti-family, and in fact still goal myself for that, but
    don't turn the office into a viewing nursery and because I'm a female
    don't expect me to goo and gaa over baby.

    NEW MOTHER IS OFTEN AN EMOTIONALLY SENSITIVE STATE, AND NEW MOTHERS
    MIGHT OCCASIONALLY BE OFFENDED IF THE NEW FATHER TOOK THE NEW BABY
    TO WORK TO SHARE THE JOY WITH WORK ASSOCIATES, SOME OF WHOM WERE
    WOMEN.  IF FATHERS SHOW OFF THE NEW BABY LESS, IT MAY BE OUT OF
    RESPECT FOR THIS SENSITIVITY.

    This note has been dormant for some time, but I thought I'd see
    if it could be resurrected with some different material.
    
    I had discovered the literature around women and food and hunger
    last year.  Books that I loved were _The_Obsession_ and
    _The_Hungry_Self, both by Kim Chernin.  My hubby and I have a habit
    of reading aloud to each other when we're reading something we really
    enjoy.  I was so thrilled to have a writer declaring what I'd
    experienced within me was true and valid, that I began to read phrases
    and paragraphs to him.
    
    It meant nothing to him.  _Nothing_.  He reacted with puzzled disbelief
    when I first read passages to him, then became argumentative because
    he couldn't find it "logical" that the things Ms. Chernin talked
    about were true.  It was only after I'd begun to cry and said that
    I was just trying to share the feelings with him, because Ms. Chernin
    said so eloquently what I'd never been able to put into words myself,
    that he became apologetic and admitted that the concepts were so
    foreign to him they just didn't click.
    
    I was grateful for the apologia, and also the tender way he treated
    me over the next two weeks.  He did that because he realized that
    something of tremendous importance to me was outside his personal
    knowledge, and was trying to show what else he could offer, even
    if it wasn't what I might have desired.  I was happy.  But at the 
    moment I felt in my gut that our experiences in this area (around 
    the psychological importance of hunger, nurturance, self-determination
    and the lack thereof and how they are often tied together for many 
    women) might as well have been at opposite ends of the earth, I 
    felt like the loneliest person on earth.
    
    Marcia