Psi-Ed class eyeopener and possible solution for the homosexual double standard.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by spw184

 

Also I read an article recently about a family that was keeping their babies gender a secret from everyone, but it's siblings so other people won't influence in just the ways you listed. I wish I could find the good article I read, it was unbiased and scientific, but this is all I could find so it will have to do: www.smosh.com...

This was recently a lesson in a Women's Studies course I am taking. We read an article about Baby X, www.sa.ucsb.edu... the basis of this article is the same as the couple you referred to. It is allowing the child to find themselves, and whatever they are more comfortable with, rather than society telling him/'her how he/she should dress/act/learn, because of the sex they were born as.

While I am not sure I personally would be able to do such a thing, I can tell you this - I have three sons and one daughter. Two of my boys, one is 17 and one is 3, have hair longer than mine, and mine goes past the middle of my back. Many people have called them girls based on the length of their hair, irregardless of the boy type clothing they wear. I feel this kind of stereotyping is what gender bias is all about. We all tend to place people into categories based on looks.

I hear yeh, When I came out of the closet nobody wanted to beleive me and thought it was some sort of joke, Because I never took intrest in any of the "Girly" Things... Except for music. And now, I get hit on by girls and have to constantly spew the words "Im gay." When I was younger, in about 7th - 8th grade, I was the smartest in my classes, and I wore glasses (Not anymore ). I was a "Nerd" However, unlike most nerds, i had this magical thing called "Social skills" >:O OMFG RUNNNNN!!! Yeah, so I made alot of popular people not become popular because people where to scared to come near me, and when i was hanging out with them they would literaly RUN AWAY ._.

Originally posted by Menrva

Originally posted by GuyverUnit I
WOW!
And to think all this time I thought it were things like a uterus and testicles, estrogen and testosterone, breast and scrotum, DNA and Y chromosomes that "genderize" people.

Turns out it was over exposure to those evil Tonka trucks and LEGO blocks!!!!

Gender and sex are two completely different things. "Sex" is one's biological make up, as you mentioned. Gender, on the other hand, is whether a person is masculine or feminine. This is something that is taught to children, early on, through societal interactions. The definition of gender is different in different societies. For example, in some native societies, they have people who are born male, but live as a female. While this is considered a "transvestite" in America, in the native society it is not a big deal.

Didnt I already say this? lol, and i didnt know about the pink/blue thing, NEWS 2 MEH

reply to post by spw184

I will probably get flamed for this and called a sexist, but I think guys have more pressure on them. Historically, the toughest challenge for a women was finding a man and learning how to be a mother. That's a very tough job, but what about the men? The men worked and worked and worked some of the crappiest jobs ever known. Many of them died because the work itself was too dangerous. Men were put into military service too. They had to see blood and guts and actually shoot the other guy or be shot. The women served as medics, if they served at all. This is a big reason why women tended to live longer than men. Men were trained from a young age to be tough and to deal with the cold reality of this world. Women are taught more about the inner reality inside us. This helps them to be better mothers and prevent mayhem from ensuing in the house. Etc. These are just some of my random thoughts about it.

We perceive women to be weaker, and still do. That's why boys playing with girl toys is considered worse than girls playing with boy toys. It's a deep biological prejudice.

But by giving men too much power we also risk blowing ourselves up in a mushroom cloud. Why? Because we do not understand the inner reality as well as women do. We could probably benefit by having more women in power, but the chemistry of power will have to change for that to happen because, historically, the chemistry favored men rather than women.

Even though we strive for equality, men still dominate the jobs that MATTER.

I found this to be interesting:
www.askmen.com ...

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by spw184

 

I will probably get flamed for this and called a sexist, but I think guys have more pressure on them. Historically, the toughest challenge for a women was finding a man and learning how to be a mother. That's a very tough job, but what about the men? The men worked and worked and worked some of the crappiest jobs ever known. Many of them died because the work itself was too dangerous. Men were put into military service too. They had to see blood and guts and actually shoot the other guy or be shot. The women served as medics, if they served at all. This is a big reason why women tended to live longer than men. Men were trained from a young age to be tough and to deal with the cold reality of this world. Women are taught more about the inner reality inside us. This helps them to be better mothers and prevent mayhem from ensuing in the house. Etc. These are just some of my random thoughts about it.

We perceive women to be weaker, and still do. That's why boys playing with girl toys is considered worse than girls playing with boy toys. It's a deep biological prejudice.

But by giving men too much power we also risk blowing ourselves up in a mushroom cloud. Why? Because we do not understand the inner reality as well as women do. We could probably benefit by having more women in power, but the chemistry of power will have to change for that to happen because, historically, the chemistry favored men rather than women.

Even though we strive for equality, men still dominate the jobs that MATTER.

edit on 17-9-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

No your not sexist at all, men have been of higher importance than woman in history.
I dont know if this was in my OP but mothers are more likely to tell thier female daughters to talk about their emotions when they cry, but when boys do (Boys are actually biologicly MORE LIKELY to cry) The fathers attitude is "Just stop it >:O"

It does seem like, me being a male, that if you're averse to the cold reality of this world and you're not well educated (enough to be a power player) then life is a very rundown beatnik bumpy ride. To make matters worse, I socially am a disaster. And no confidence.

What I'm saying is... while men might dominate things that matter, it's not peachy... I mean, it's like saying that tolerating the cold brutal bloody reality of this world is a good thing...

We need men to protect us from other men. That's my jab at men.

reply to post by jonnywhite


Err.. Ok than

reply to post by spw184


Well maybe you are confusing the ideology of homosexual with gay MAN.

Homosexual Men Have Lower Incomes Than Heterosexual Men, But Lesbians Have Higher Income Than Straight Women
www.sciencedaily.com...

A new study in the Canadian Journal of Economics provides the first evidence on sexual orientation and economic outcomes in Canada. The study found that gay men have 12 percent lower personal incomes and lesbians have 15 percent higher personal incomes than heterosexual men and women.

Yeah.... sounds like a conspiracy against homosexual men.

Sexual Orientation Affects Cancer Survivorship, Study Finds
www.sciencedaily.com...

Gay men have a higher prevalence of cancer compared with heterosexual men, and lesbian and bisexual female cancer survivors report lower levels of health than heterosexual female cancer survivors.

As a previous poster stated there is masculine and there is feminine. Homosexual men engaging in feminine sexual activities (often involving the brown bomber) is often unsettling to men because being penetrated is for WOMEN. Genetic fact here. . . .

The double standard is that the feminine does not know what the hell it wants. There can be no standard when one party does not clearly state and act on their desires.

Rating Attractiveness: Consensus Among Men, Not Women, Study Finds
www.sciencedaily.com...

"Men agree a lot more about who they find attractive and unattractive than women agree about who they find attractive and unattractive," says Wood, assistant professor of psychology. "This study shows we can quantify the extent to which men agree about which women are attractive and vice versa."

I have a feeling you are falling victim to nature and science is exposing this.

Sexual Orientation Unconsciously Affects Our Impressions of Others, Canadian Study Suggests
www.sciencedaily.com...

"These findings suggest that sexual orientation, despite lacking explicit perceptual markers, infiltrates the automatic impression that is formed. Further, our judgment of gay men depends on whether they are white or black."

Here now you can even call them racists if bigot isn't enough.

Sexual Orientation Affects How We Navigate And Recall Lost Objects, According To Study
www.sciencedaily.com...

The University of Warwick researchers worked with the BBC to collect data from over 198,000 people aged 20–65 years (109,612 men and 88,509 women). As expected they found men outperformed women on tests such as mentally rotating objects (NB the researchers’ tests used abstract objects but the skills used are also those one would use in real life to navigate with a map). They found that women outperformed men in verbal dexterity tests, and remembering the locations of objects. However for a number of tasks the University of Warwick researchers found key differences across the range of sexual orientations studied.

I majored in Consumer Science so I can also tell you that the MSM strongly reinforces their support for metro sexual and the much more metro homosexual because they spend even more money than women on fashion and other worthless baubles that are only valuable in an urban cityscape (where most homosexuals are). So you are right about media enforcing gender roles. Note the article above about gay black men then look at the trend in rap music where the "artist" is covered in shiny rocks and obsessed with the latest shoe release.

Factors Influencing the Emergence of the Metrosexual
www.fcs.uga.edu/ss/docs/conseur_amanda_a_200405_ms.pdf (its a pdf doc)

Metrosexuals are especially of interest to marketers as traditional men, “don't, respond to consumer capitalism as much as the new breed of man who is more ...

Metrosexuals and hip hop stars: a consumer culture war
trueslant.com...

The rest of the culture is going the other way. Rather than macho posturing, feminine preening has become popular among young middle and upper class men. It is nearly impossible to name any actors under forty who possess the bravado and “don’t-#-with-me” appeal of Brando, Newman, Pacino, or De Niro. The strength of Springsteen and charming chauvinism of the Stones has given way to numbingly earnest rockers who continually find new ways to whine over power chords. Popular culture is idealizing softer men and comforting confused middle and upper class men, while the metrosexual grows in alarming force and number.

Many women in trendy nightclubs and in high priced circles may be seeking the hands of men that not only have freshly trimmed cuticles and overly lotioned palms, but have also fully submitted to the pull or popular culture and slick advertising

The so called double standard is a byproduct of nature.


Personally I think gays are just jealous of all the attention women get for being "victims". It all just seems like a sick victim fetish. Standard "liberal" affair where they are being oppressed and none of it is of their own doing.

reply to post by MasterGemini


I never knew about the income thing!! Good thing my boss doesn't know im gay

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by spw184

 

I was actually wondering the other day when and why pink became feminized. I mean, it's just a color, we only relate it to girls because we have for so long. When and why did it become "girly?"

I would love to know the reason for that also. My wife is about as girly as women come, very feminine in every way, and she hates pink, even on a vehicle. Her favourite color? Blue. My Daughter did not play a lot with dolls, she rather played with her brother's toy cars and toy guns. They often played war games together. Today she is happily married with a son. See? these things have nothing to do with gender identity.

Originally posted by autowrench

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by spw184

 

I was actually wondering the other day when and why pink became feminized. I mean, it's just a color, we only relate it to girls because we have for so long. When and why did it become "girly?"

I would love to know the reason for that also. My wife is about as girly as women come, very feminine in every way, and she hates pink, even on a vehicle. Her favourite color? Blue. My Daughter did not play a lot with dolls, she rather played with her brother's toy cars and toy guns. They often played war games together. Today she is happily married with a son. See? these things have nothing to do with gender identity.

Well colors and light can have an immense impact on the human body.

What's in a Color? The Unique Human Health Effects of Blue Light
ehp03.niehs.nih.gov...:doi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.118-a22

In 1958, J. Woodland Hastings and Beatrice M. Sweeney tested the ability of different wavelengths of light—corresponding to different colors—to shift the circadian rhythm in the photosynthetic marine dinoflagellate Gonyaulax polyedra. The greatest power to reset the organism’s daily meter lay in the blues, with a precipitous decline into the greens and a modest boost in the reds.

Hastings and Sweeney’s paper, published in the December 1958 Biological Bulletin, gathered dust for decades. No one thought these findings might hold any relevance for humans, whose circadian rhythms were then widely believed to be relatively insensitive to light.

But scientific discoveries in the past two decades have changed all that. Not only does light reset the human circadian rhythm, but the same blue light that has the strongest impact on dinoflagellates has equal power to reset our own clocks—although most visible wavelengths can reset the clock, the blues do the job with the greatest efficiency.

And in a less scientific manner:

Color psychology
en.wikipedia.org...

Light, color, and surroundings

Light and color can influence how people perceive the area around them. Different light sources affect how the colors of walls and other objects are seen. Specific hues of colors seen under natural sunlight may vary when seen under the light from an incandescent (tungsten) light-bulb: lighter colors may appear to be more orange or "brownish" and darker colors may appear even darker.[9] Light and the color of an object can affect how one perceives its positioning. If light or shadow, or the color of the object, masks an object's true contour (outline of a figure) it can appear to be shaped differently than it really is.[9] Objects under a uniform light-source will promote better impression of three-dimensional shape.[9] Although more evidence is needed, it is believed that the color of objects can affect how one perceives their motion. Under a uniform light source objects of different color can more easily be seen moving in different directions. However, under variable light sources, which are more often encountered, the motion of objects can be masked or not perceived as easily because one's mind is preoccupied with trying to differentiate the contour and color of the objects.[9]

Criticism

Inherent difficulties in properly controlling trials of color's effect on human beings mean that a subject's expectations and cultural bias cannot be ruled out. Moreover, much evidence is anecdotal (e.g. the blue street lighting case) or based on data that includes confounders (e.g. the shirt-color correlation). Chromotherapy, a form of alternative medicine, is based on the hypothesis that distinct colors have health effects[10] unrelated to the aforementioned placebo effect. Such profound claims are the subject of skepticism and are often regarded as pseudoscience.

Originally posted by autowrench

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by spw184

 

See? these things have nothing to do with gender identity.

No... They do. Color and other miniscule things have huge impacts on children. Its like a guidebook on the basics to fit the "mold", and it teaches us to be unionized from day 1.