Meg
New Member
Posts: 86
|
Post by Meg on Jul 24, 2005 12:10:16 GMT 10
There was a story about that in the paper today. Not about Jamie Lee but a woman who is genetically male (XY) but has the appearance of a female. She identifys as female too. It's facinating how this gender thing works. Of course, it's said that none of us is entirely male or female anyway.
On Compass tonight the topic is intersexuals. Should be interesting to watch.
|
|
4213
New Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by 4213 on Jul 24, 2005 12:35:32 GMT 10
Varying degrees exist. Girly Girls, Blokey Blokes and somewhere in between.
Yes Compass always is interesting to watch. Very topical for us currently. Apparently 1% of births are born intersexual. I feel it is a cruel twist of nature when the wrong soul ends up in the wrong overcoat.
|
|
|
Post by Test Card Girl on Jul 24, 2005 18:39:30 GMT 10
sokay, meg As for Babs he is a toady. Full stop. PS He was on about Beethoven's era. The question was far far broader than that. When he earns $300,000 a year and gets some guts Then you can praise his weak contributions. What Babs said was true about gender and composers. It wasn't just in Beethoven's era. Music composition from the Baroque era right up to the 20th century was a man's world. In Italian and German courts for several centuries, rich princes and aristocrats would employ "kapellmeisters" (don't know what the term is in Italian) to write music for birthday celebrations or religious festivals or ordinary Sunday services - Bach, Haydn, Mozart were all employed this way at some stage of their lives. In those centuries, there were more composers than you can poke a stick at - we only know of a handful because their music has survived and the only way for your compositions to survive in those days of hand-written manuscripts is to be a court composer.These were prestigious positions - can you imagine a woman being given this position in those days? And so music composition remained a man's occupation until the Twentieth century. Female composers do start emerging in the 19th century like Clara Schumann then in the early 20th century like Nadia Bolanger. There are Australian composers like Peggy Glanville -Hicks, Miriam Hyde and Margaret Sutherland. Yes, they are not as well known as Beethoven or Bach or Mozart but they are well-respected. By the way, I've remembered the name of a pre-Baroque female composer who is recognised these days as a musical genius - Hildegard von Bingen who was alive in the 12th century.
|
|
|
Post by marysunshine on Jul 24, 2005 18:51:53 GMT 10
I agree with a lot that's been said here.. BUT. In the original post of this thread it was asked "List one or more of the areas where clearly men are superior". Personally once we passed the female to male (excuse the term) pissing contest, that is we as females let the males know we're just as good as them in every area, in fact we're better than them.. I would have liked that question answered. Why do women have problems acknowledging their men? It's not a slight on us that a male may have a strength. The plus would then be the natural progression and opportunity for the other side to then be explored. That is validating female strengths.
I don't believe the answer to the battle of the sexes is androgyny either. Get real. We are different and there is nothing wrong with that. I have this awful vision of a bland homogenised world. No religion, no gender.. no passion.
|
|
4213
New Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by 4213 on Jul 24, 2005 19:19:17 GMT 10
But the Battle of the Sexes has wasted so much energy. Look at the title Sirius posted. It really was procovative, and provoke he certainly did. Bazza used the same tactics? Why bother? What is the objective?. It could have been better phrased to achieve a more harmonious outcome.
Can I remind you what androgeny means - A view of maturity that requires humans to integrate the male (rational, efficient, scientific) and female (affective, compassionate, artistic) elements of their nature in order to achieve balance.
How you consider that as homogenised I don't know? I don't feel we'd lose anything, but just learn to use both sides we historically have not been encouraged to nuture.
|
|
Meg
New Member
Posts: 86
|
Post by Meg on Jul 24, 2005 21:48:56 GMT 10
The question 'why are men more creative?' is problematic. You are being creative when you decorate a cake. There is no doubt men have been more creative in the public arena and women have been disadvantaged in that opportunity has been denied them. Acknowledging that achievements of this kind is not a good indicator clears the way for a balanced evaluation.
I don't know if men are more creative. Creativity is broader than composing a symphony. It's sewing and flower arranging or even putting up a shelf.
|
|
|
Post by marysunshine on Jul 24, 2005 21:51:16 GMT 10
If the aim was for harmony, then I agree. Being provocative usually stirs emotion that dig deep. What I don't quite understand is that I can almost guarantee that all the women in this thread knew e-x-a-c-t-l-y what game was being played. Yet we went along the predictable path of biting. All of us. If only we had just answered the baiting question and manipulated the topic our way.
You've given a selected meaning of androgyny. I've found a few, one standing out as 'Being neither distinguishably masculine nor feminine'. Yet if I were to springboard off your definition alone, I still don't like it. Who says a balance needs to be achieved 'within' each of us? Maybe the balance is to be achieved between the genders rather than each gender blending the male and female within. It's a stretch in my opinion to believe that man and woman will achieve a type of sameness. That the evolution of man is to be half male and female and the evolution of woman is to be equally half and half. That almost repulses me. We are supposed to be predominantly female or male. Some of us have a different mix but most of us are either one or the other.
|
|
|
Post by marysunshine on Jul 24, 2005 21:54:57 GMT 10
The question 'why are men more creative?' is problematic. You are being creative when you decorate a cake. There is no doubt men have been more creative in the public arena and women have been disadvantaged in that opportunity has been denied them. Acknowledging that achievements of this kind is not a good indicator clears the way for a balanced evaluation. I don't know if men are more creative. Creativity is broader than composing a symphony. It's sewing and flower arranging or even putting up a shelf. I agree about the creativity of the 'mundane'.
|
|
|
Post by sirius on Jul 25, 2005 14:18:57 GMT 10
Mary has got my motives exactly right. How can a REAL man resist provocation to see what he gets in return in a smug forum like this? I made a few jottings prior to posting the topic and the most predictable members leapt to defend their species regardles of facts and proceeded to obfuscate around the question .
All I wanted was the truth.
Even, yes but we make better icing on our cakes (though debatable if the cake was for a royal wedding for example) but men (to this point in time) design and make tunnels, bridges and cars would have been a start.
An answer like that even just one would have been great and heartening as well.
But no this was not the case.
Had it been about your favourite soap or serial an example would have been given.
Mary the trend towards Androgeny is ever so slight. Testosterone levels have been falling in men and increasing in women, but very slowly and may well be cyclical.
Some members thing environment not nature is responsible, this is a half truth.
As the environment changes nature responds and nature has and always will control our responses tho eco changes.
This is done at sub atomic level and is evolutionary and another subject altogether.
My deliberate baiting of poor Babs was taken rather well I thought, so credit to you all there. the guy is a budding genius no doubt and I wish him all the best.
|
|
4213
New Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by 4213 on Jul 25, 2005 14:30:44 GMT 10
Well, it was obvious you were being provocative, and I personally, intended not to bite. However, of course we defend our species with the dominant male arrogance we encounter still today. If you want honesty you have to give it first. I majorly bit my tongue in this thread and gave you a serve of provocation back.
|
|
|
Post by sirius on Jul 25, 2005 14:39:56 GMT 10
Well, it was obvious you were being provocative, and I personally, intended not to bite. However, of course we defend our species with the dominant male arrogance we encounter still today. If you want honesty you have to give it first. I majorly bit my tongue in this thread and gave you a serve of provocation back. Aur contraire, I love and praise women and never lie. Yes you saw through my provocation but conceded nothing.
|
|
|
Post by tqisfoo on Jul 25, 2005 14:52:44 GMT 10
I'll concede this:
|
|
4213
New Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by 4213 on Jul 25, 2005 15:00:58 GMT 10
hahaha. Great a metaphoric kick in the balls simply isn't sufficent at times.
|
|
|
Post by sirius on Jul 25, 2005 15:19:39 GMT 10
hahaha. Great a metaphoric kick in the balls simply isn't sufficent at times. Men haters are we?
|
|
4213
New Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by 4213 on Jul 25, 2005 15:25:02 GMT 10
I'm a lover not a fighter. I love men too. I wish I loved women at times.
|
|