----- Original Message -----
From: Shad Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2000 8:37 AM
Subject: Re: [issues] Skud's new article on geek chicks..
> Rik Hemsley wrote:
> >
> > Hmm. I'd say that left to their own devices men will just start
> > getting worse again. They certainly need some prompting.
>
> As a man I resent that statement. Men are not "Neanderthals". We have a
> brain. We have morals. We know the differece between right and wrong. We
> need to stop judging *all* present men because of:
>
> 1. What *some* men did in the past.
>
> 2. What a small *minority* of men feel today.
>
> 3. It took the efforts of both men and women to get where we are today.
Valid points, all (though I wish that 'minority' were far smaller). One
thing that sometimes gets overlooked is that many of the men who
abuse/ignore/mistreat women will just as easily to the same to other men.
Among those men who have been on the receiving end of this bullying are some
who realize just as clearly as women that the best response is not always to
hit back, but to do their best to foster and environment where this kind of
behaviour isn't welcome -- or necessary.
That being said, it remains *far* easier for men to succeed by excluding
others, either by force or more subtle societal means.
> There are so many issues involved with why history went the way it did.
Indeed. Starhawk has a pretty interesting reading of how the dominance of
men came about in her book _The Spiral Dance_. I don't know about it's
foundation in known historical fact, but it is at least a thought-provoking
hypothesis.
> Many of those issues are not present today. The world is a very
> different place.
>
> Enlightenment happens to both sexes.
Agreed. And this is critical: Men are going to be the ones who change male
their behaviour, just as it's finally up to the alcoholic to stop
drinking.[*]
If I can take that analogy a step further, when a person stops drinking,
there's a tendency to reject everything s/he was. Only with the passage of
time does such a person realize that there are many things about her/himself
that are worth keeping. So, once we've gone beyond the surface treatment of
banging a drum in the woods a la Robert Bly, there are many aspects of being
a man that should be kept, and fostered in others.
And on the other side of the equation, there are aspects of what society
recognizes as feminine character that could stand to be kept, and aspects
that perhaps should be left behind.
I suspect that with time, we'll find an equilibrium of differences that will
embrace not only the broader behaviours that currently define the masculine
and the feminine, but the wide and nuanced range in between these
generalizations.
[* I won't soon forget the day years ago that a feminist friend of a friend
pointed out to me firm but friendly terms that the 'girls at work' (my
phrase) were probably 'women'. It took someone with her tact and strength to
teach me this small but crucial lesson. But it was still up to me to take it
to heart, and to change my language and hence my assumptions.]
--
Dan McGarry
http://www.moodindigo.com/
************
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
