This reminds of the incident with athlete Richard Sherman over MLK weekend. He was called a thug (and other racial slurs) when he spoke passionately and aggressively after a game. Would an aggressive white athlete be called a thug? I doubt it. Too often the word we use to describe one person would be completely different if only race/gender were changed.
Difference in Perception
Tue Jul 8th 2014 by abagond
Posted in stuff | 103 Comments
103 Responses
Leave a comment
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Recent Comments
- gro jo on Trump’s hush money trial
- biff on Trump’s hush money trial
- gro jo on Trump’s hush money trial
- biff on Trump’s hush money trial
- gro jo on Trump’s hush money trial
- gro jo on Trump’s hush money trial
- Solitaire on Trump’s hush money trial
- Solitaire on Trump’s hush money trial
- biff on Trump’s hush money trial
- Solitaire on Trump’s hush money trial
- biff on Trump’s hush money trial
- Solitaire on Trump’s hush money trial
- Solitaire on Trump’s hush money trial
- biff on Trump’s hush money trial
- Solitaire on Trump’s hush money trial
-
New Stuff
- New English Bible
- Joanie Sommers: Johnny Get Angry
- Trump’s hush money trial
- Amalek
- Doris Troy: What’cha Gonna Do About It
- An Appeal to Heaven Flag
- The genocide in Gaza: a media guide
- songs in Latin
- New York Times’ style guide for Gaza
- Charles Aznavour: La Bohème
- Israel’s genocidal intent in Gaza
- Ta-Nehisi Coates on Palestine
- Top Black languages
- Best quotes on Gaza
- Macklemore: Hind’s Hall
- Columbia University protest in 2024
- Hind Rajab (هند رجب)
- Portuguese media diet review
- How to deny a genocide
- Anitta, Ludmilla & Snoop Dogg: Onda Diferente
- Oz Bambaz: Balangandã
- Savanofsky: Only KJV
- Neil Diamond: If You Know What I Mean
- Beyonce: Blackbird
- Joan Osborne: One of Us
- Rita Lee: Lança Perfume
- The Raspberries: Go All the Way
- Ananda, Joker Beats: Quero Que Tu Vá
- Marisa Monte: Beija Eu
- Portuguese: a brief history
Good Stuff
Old Stuff
Other Stuff
Pages
- About
- Broken Records
- Comment Policy
- Glossary
- Links
- Open Thread
- Open Thread – Aug 2015 to Oct 2016
- Open Thread – Dec 2010 to Jan 2012
- Open Thread – Dec 2014 to Aug 2015
- Open Thread – Jan 2012 to Jun 2012
- Open Thread – Jan 2014 to Jul 2014
- Open Thread – Jul 2014 to Dec 2014
- Open Thread – Jun 2012 to Nov 2012
- Open Thread – Nov 2012 to Sep 2013
- Open Thread – Nov 2017 to Dec 2023
- Open Thread – Oct 2016 to Nov 2017
- Open Thread – Sep 2013 to Dec 2013
- Promised
-
Join 2,337 other subscribers.
Now reading:
Richard Sherman (a Compton, CA native and Stanford graduate) had JUST competed in the NFC championship game. The white female NFL commentator nearly beat the game clock (that ended regulation) to speak with Sherman. She caught Sherman when his emotions and hormone levels were at their peak. If you never played sports, especially hard-nosed sports, you’ll never know what it feels like to do your job. As a former athlete, I definitely know what it feels like to be victorious and full of emotions, testosterone, gH, and adrenaline, simultaneously.
I loved Sherman’s calm and cool interviews. In one of Sherman’s interviews he let the subtle racist Skip Bayless have it. He mentioned the barbaric, brutal acts of NHL players, which NO one says a word about them. As he said, when two hockey players (two angry white guys on ice) go at each other’s brain with their fists or club nobody says anything, but when a black football player shouts his confidence (in words) at his opponent(s) or critics he’s labelled the new N-word – “thug”. It’s totally unfair.
We have to realize that the average black athlete is confident. There’s an absolute difference between cockiness and confidence. According to Google Search, the definition of confidence is ‘a feeling of self-assurance arising from one’s appreciation of one’s own abilities or qualities’. Most black athletes are confident, which is a self-reliant trait most white athletes lack.
LikeLike
Plain and simple it’s a thing called “Double Standards.”
LikeLike
@Michael Cooper: Great points.
LikeLike
To George Ryder
Everyone should know the confidence level of black athletes – after all thousands of arena and stadium-seated white people pay big bucks to see confident black athletes. Would you call that “very dumb and “laughable” too?
LikeLike
The pictures description and analysis may lack nuance. Only the most urban and sophisticated white people would call the white woman with blue hair and a lip ring “alternative” but many others would use words like “weird” or “trashy”. Outside of a major urban area, a white woman with blue hair and a lip ring would be very unusual and not in a good way.
As for the black woman, through whose lens is she “ghetto”. I’m not sure most whites have enough sense of black style to really say what it means for a black woman to have blue hair. If its done well, and she is attractive and nonthreatening it may not be an issue. The lip ring is a non-starter black or white. She isn’t making a statement to white society through her choice of lip ring and hair color. The white woman is making a statement.
So, I think the white woman would be treated worse overall by whites than the black woman. The white woman is part of white society, which at base is rather conservative. She is not conforming. And the lip ring is a kind of middle finger to white middle class social mores. She’s gonna get a kind of cold shoulder because she is offensive to white society whereas the black woman isn’t a member of white society so, here appearance doesn’t matter, unless she needs a job.
I see your point about the “thug” word as ascribed to Richard Sherman. Whites treat blacks with a double standard. I think its due to a lack of trust.
Whites don’t generally trust blacks, especially not loud, aggressive ones. They assume the worst. They trust each other so when they see another white being loud and aggressive they may give that person the benefit of the doubt. Trust works like that.
IMHO.
LikeLike
I agree with you, Mary. It is a double standard….based on racist, unfounded stereotyping.
LikeLike
I reblogged this here by accident. I meant it to go to my Tumblr. But since it already has comments, I will let it stand.
LikeLike
^ Cool. So that strange sense that I’m getting, is because this post doesn’t really fit here, anyway.
LikeLike
So, I think the white woman would be treated worse overall by whites than the black woman. The white woman is part of white society, which at base is rather conservative. She is not conforming. And the lip ring is a kind of middle finger to white middle class social mores. She’s gonna get a kind of cold shoulder because she is offensive to white society whereas the black woman isn’t a member of white society so, here appearance doesn’t matter, unless she needs a job.
There’s not conforming and then there’s not conforming. When one alters appearance in an impermanent way, the impermanence is obvious. A white person can always “return home” to orthodox white society when all they are doing is wearing fashion modifications which are surface level. Being “alternative” is not such a big deal anymore. (Although, I should add that what people do at the surface of their appearance can indicate deep mental attitudes; we can never know for sure just by looking at a person, can we?)
Take an appearance modification that is quite a bit more permanent and thus more of a middle finger to orthodoxy, regarding personal appearance: the neck tattoo. Nothing says, “fuck you!” quite like the neck tattoo. I’m talking ones that go from base of neck to just beneath the mandible. Egads, they are ugly! So, in contrast to coloured hair, a neck tattoo is clear communication to all that the wearer of said tattoo has a commitment to remaining outside of many orthodox/”respected” occupations and thus social circles. If the wearer of the neck tattoo does wish to have full access to mainstream society, they take an awful gamble donning that particular style of personal expression–at least for the time being, here in 2014 and for the near future, I’d say.
As a side note, the sleeve (tattoo sleeve) seems to be getting more and more of a pass, these days. A sleeve is seen (by me, but I would guess by many others too) as very aesthetic, ranging from interesting to beautiful. On women they can be very alluring. On men, I suppose they can be expressions of masculinity. So, to me the sleeve always retains a flavor of art, even if the wearer is trying to be a bad-ass at some level. The neck tattoo, however, is so hideous (to my eyes it has an illusory effect of distorting neck length) that the wearer takes on some of that hideousness, in the eye, of the beholder; and what we find ugly, we usually turn away from, not toward.
LikeLike
Julian, you did not think of it because you mistakenly posted the piece to this blog. But, since it is being kept here, you should probably link ‘woman’ and ‘Black Femininity’ to this post in a “See Also” section.
Luckily, you have tagged it under ‘stuff’.
LikeLike
To George Ryder
A couple of antagonistic comments of yours doesn’t erase the fact of what I know is true. Enjoy your day, sir!
LikeLike
Michael Cooper said
“…When two hockey players (two angry white guys on ice) go at each other’s brain with their fists or club nobody says anything, but when a black football player shouts his confidence (in words) at his opponent(s) or critics he’s labelled the new N-word – “thug”. It’s totally unfair.”
BOOM!
You hardly ever hear white athletes of any given sport being called anything nearly as close as what people refer to or portray as anything near as to how black athletes are in any given sport. From what I’ve learned during my years of blogging, the sports news media have intertwined the image of the thug or criminal and the athlete into one entity of blackness. As such, you hear not only news about black athletes latest triumphs on the field, but you also hear about which black athlete got in trouble, especially with the law, at about the same rate.
LikeLike
To George Ryder
Enjoy your day, sir.
LikeLike
As a two cent add on: I really liked Michael Cooper’s comment. Though, I didn’t agree with the second clause of the final sentence (“…which is a self-reliant trait most white athletes lack.”)
LikeLike
I saw and heard Sherman’s rant. If people don’t know theater when they see it, their problem. Also, kind of a set up. TV producers are a dishonest breed. The producer knew Sherman was good for rise. That’s why the sideline reporter was sent to him. Sherman, for someone who has been out of college for only a couple of years, is very sophisticated in the art of language. I also have heard him use advanced vocabulary typical of scholarly and literary writing, not the street. That he went to a high-echelon university might have helped, but not everyone from Stanford, Cal, Chicago, Northwestern or the Ivy League comes able to fluidly use that vocabulary. Not that I went to one of them, but I am in position to know. I’ll leave it at that.
LikeLike
“Too often the word we use to describe one person would be completely different if only race/gender were changed.”
So true… look at the difference between a ho/skank (promiscuous female) and a player/ladies’ man (promiscuous male). The females are described much more negatively than the males.
LikeLike
^ *Sigh* Not really quite the same thing.
Men and women have different roles to play out in society, they just do. Men and women have different roles to play out in social dynamics, they just do. Men and women are different, they just are. And these things should be celebrated, not PC’ed to death!
LikeLike
Yeah; as pointed out a lot of times when people make this comparisons they really don’t seem to have much of a knowledge of white society…..even bizarrely enough when they are white occasionally.
@Paige
Well; women are valued higher than men, so when they degrade themselves that way it means more…..basically men/boys are “little devils/dogs” whereas women/girls are “pretty little angels”.
That and women giving it away takes away from the accomplishment of getting them…..so people will try and reinforce behaviors so they can retain their status from being a player.
And it goes both ways; a lot of times when a woman is pushing it…..its like if a man was talking to me this way I would have uppercutted his head the heck off by now.
LikeLike
Paige,
“So true… look at the difference between a ho/skank (promiscuous female) and a player/ladies’ man (promiscuous male). The females are described much more negatively than the males.”
Or the difference between assertive men and bossy women.
LikeLike
An assertive black man is an uppity N-word. And and assertive black woman is an angry black b-word. If Johnny Football was full of bravado he would be the hero of the day. But Richard Sherman does it and he is labeled with all kinds of pejoratives. “double standards.”
LikeLike
Kiwi,
Or passionate men and emotional women, but I guess that’s just variation on a theme.
LikeLike
I dont like white men bossing me around at all…what are you talking about?
an a hole is an a hole , and they can kiss mine if they start getting bossy
LikeLike
Or the difference between assertive men and bossy women.
Ugh! This is so pretentious! So, there aren’t –under the whole wide blue sky– any women in positions of power that they don’t handle well and in fact use in an abusive, “I’ll show everyone, what’s what manner.” Give me a goddamn break, of course such women exist. (And such men exist too, and when I spot them, I certainly don’t admire their so-called assertiveness.)
LikeLike
@ Kiwi
An assertive white man is called “a leader” but an assertive Asian man is called “a c****”.
I know what you’re saying. I hope I’m not being too pedantic: For me (but maybe I’m not seeing stuff that really is happening) it’s more of, “that well behaved little Asian needs to get back to being an obedient little Asian guy.” Saying that, is not as bad (so white men think) as saying c****.
LikeLike
@ Mary Burrell
An assertive black man is an uppity N-word.
In a similar vein, to my response to Kiwi, I don’t think what you’re saying there is ubiquitous in any place that matters. Maybe some yokel in some backwater might respond in the way you point out in your comment. What I think is more ubiquitous is the concept, and labelling, of an assertive black man as:
• a danger
• a threat
• hostile
• out of line (same thing as uppity, pretty much).
But again, maybe I’m being pedantic with you and Kiwi…
LikeLike
“An assertive white man is called “a leader” but an assertive Asian man is called an X”
I find it’s more like, an assertive White man (or even woman) is a “Leader.”.. an assertive or intelligent Black man… they’re just not sure what to do with.
LikeLike
@Kiwi
When one of my male family members was a manager, he described how whites working underneath him acted strangely, like they could not get over the adjustment of having to work below a nonwhite for the first time.
These extra dimensions of life, that people of colour live in, require Solomon level wisdom and good personal resources to contend with.
LikeLike
@ George Ryder
LOL! 😀
LikeLike
@Legion : Yeah, your’e being pedantic.
LikeLike
@Legion: You’re perception of the world and mine are different. Let’s respectfully agree to disagree.
LikeLike
^ Okay.
LikeLike
Another great post Abagond.
Lol @Men and women.
Respectfully, It’s ironic when minorities who complain about racism and being treated differently turn and perpetuate s-xism towards another minority group. Essentially, a White person could simply say White people and Black people are just different, so they need to be treated differently and there’s no point getting politically correct about it . . .. but of course, we wouldn’t agree with that now, would we? Wink wink.
LikeLike
This is very true!
For example, I’ve heard people call White women who mimic African American cultural fashions, like Gwen Stefani and Fergie from The Black Eyed Peas, edgy and fashion fashion icons, while in the same breath referring to Mary J Blige as dressing like a street walker, even though it’s the same look, the same cultural expression, but the latter’s organic culture. The only difference is Gwen and Fergie are White and Mary J Blige is Black.
This difference in perception is extremely common in my experience.
LikeLike
@ Ebonymonroe: Those are great examples.
LikeLike
Thank ya, baby.
LikeLike
Ebony, you said it. But not just African American culture.
How “bold” are the Madonnas, Gwen Stefanis and Miley Cyruses, when they wear the “exotic” bit of Asia, too, like bindis and saris, and such?
Yet, the same people that that think these women mentioned above are bold, might not think Asian women who wear do bindis and saris as anything much — because that is part of some pendantic cultural symbolism.
Typical foreigners! just not trying hard enough to assimilate!
That’s usually enough reason to scorn them and tell them to “go back to India” for doing so. (Of course that doesn’t stop “bold” and white from keeping their yoga mats, though.)
http://shamelessmag.com/blog/entry/not-your-fashion-dots-the-continuous-appropriatio/
LikeLike
*pedantic
(off to bed)
LikeLike
@Bulanik: Good points. Excellent post as always.
LikeLike
@ Mary, thank you.
@ Ebony — before I forget, I replied to your previous commentaries about Adele and Amy Whitehouse being perceived, and rewarded, as “super talented” proponents of a music-form of of black origin whilst black soul singers of at least comparable talent aren’t perceived as “super” as they are.
That was the 4th enlargement of American whiteness thread. I was caught up with word and was late in replying, and Abagond subsequently erased the posts because they were about the music industry.
Perhaps we can have a word about your point at another time soon. 😀
(But must take a journey on the feather chariot for now…)
LikeLike
*I was caught up with work (ugh)
LikeLike
Absolutely @Bulanik.
When White people take on any culture that isn’t theirs, it is an achievement. “They’ve conqured and surpassed the originals, they’re showing the natives how to perfect their look, their cultural expressions.” When POC do it, it’s weird, it’s “other,” and subsequently, it carries with it whatever stereotypes are associated with that culture.
It’s very strange, indeed and dare I say it, racist. In fact, it’s a great example of what racism has morphed into, a more subtle, dangerously intangible form.
Sleep well
LikeLike
@ Ebonymonroe
I agree that sexism often gets overlooked, justified, excused, and swept under the rug. I think that we must all become more diligently aware of that fact.
But I always feel that I should insert this small warning—that “Race” is not real biologically, whereas “Gender” is completely real biologically.
So there is some difference, I think, in how the two concepts are examined.
LikeLike
@Kiwi
Chuck Norris comes to mind.
@King
I respect your right to your opinion. Both racism and s-xism/misogyny are founded on physical determining one’s place in hierarchy however; whether biological or not, biology should not determine someone’s worth or place. I feel it’s extreme hypocrisy to complain about racism and then turn and mould and shape what is labelled “White racist arguments” here, into justifications for s-xism/misogyny, which is terribly prevalent even in 2014. You’re socialised differently and that’s just the way it is, but women do act this way which makes the stereotype true, but it’s theology, we’re different so it’s only natural, it’s biology. Or the paternal “we care about you Bill O Reilly speech” reshaped into the “you’re just special-be all you can be-patronising speech.” Oh The different persceptions of bigotry in all its pseudo intellectual forms. But, in the same way most White people can’t understand racism, this is not something most men will get, it’s almost impossible for people to see past their privilege. But it goes to show that bigotry only matters to most people when a particular form of bigotry affects them.
LikeLike
@ Ebony
Agree. And I also agree that we as males have a tendency to be blind to male privilege and to occurrences of misogyny. However, that doesn’t mean that race and gender are socially equivalent, and I’m assuming that’s not the point you are making either.
@ Kiwi
It depends on what specific meanings and what politics you choose to pour into those words.
LikeLike
Ebony said:
Essentially, a White person could simply say White people and Black people are just different, so they need to be treated differently and there’s no point getting politically correct about it . . .. but of course, we wouldn’t agree with that now, would we? Wink wink.
(Wink, wink yourself! You’ve been a rascal lately.)
Preface: I’m tired and not really willing or even prepared to defend my position to the teeth (I sort of feel like it doesn’t need defending too), consequently I may make a critical error which will be exploited by the fine intellects who contribute to this blog, I’m willing to risk getting some egg on my face over this, though. Anyway, I’m not even arguing, per se, my comments above about man and woman are just me sharing what I think.
Now onward:
Well, I’ll borrow from King. Races are not real, that is why the labelling going on in the sports example are a con, a scam!
I’m not a crazy person. I don’t think women should be kept from working and kept from financial success, or kept out of the work place, etc. But in male/female relating to do with sexuality and sex roles, it’s just obvious that each have their natural roles. I can’t argue that point anymore than I can argue that there is a “U” in USA. It’s not an argument, it’s just how things are.
———————————————–
A memory:
I’m reminded of the crazy school somewhere in Europe where they were going to make the girls do boy things and make the boys do girl things because identity is “just a social construction.” I wept inside over how screwed up for life those kids were going to be because of bizzarro intellectuals, bereft of souls and decency and common sense, who had administrative power to implement their “modern education program” or whatever the hell they would have called it.
Sorry not to source the whole thing or be more properly descriptive, some of you will remember about it though from hearing it in the news back when it made the headlines. I’m too tired to do a google search to be more explicit about it. I mentioned it once before on the blog.
LikeLike
Addressing the original post again:
I don’t think the dichotomy in the pictorial makes sense. The black girl/woman would be seen as sporting an alternative style but may face exclusion because black women are not supposed to be “alternative”. Similar to what commenter Phoebeprunelle has said about twits telling her, “Oh, I didn’t think black girls were into retro/vintage style.”
“Ghetto” has different imagery to it:
big bums, distasteful spandex, loud talk, bad weave jobs, gaudiness, etc.
LikeLike
This enlightened quote pertains to my initial comment:
“When there’s a disagreement, the wise will humble himself and move on and the ignorant will keep disagreeing.”
– Frederick Douglass
LikeLike
Michael Cooper,
““When there’s a disagreement, the wise will humble himself and move on and the ignorant will keep disagreeing.”
– Frederick Douglass”
From what I know of Frederick Douglass he wasn’t the move on kind.
But when you are the one being oppressed it’s pretty hard to just move on.
But I guess it depends on what you’re moving on to.
LikeLike
The thing about male/female sexual double standard: that it is natural and ok for men to have multiple sexual partners but wrong for a woman, is that it inherently puts women and men at odds. A man’s ability to sleep with multiple women is predicated upon women sleeping with multiple men. Unless we’re talking about polygamy which wouldn’t benefit most men as the population is evenly split between the two genders.
This double standard turns sex into a game of winners and losers and is destructive to amicable relationships between men and women.
LikeLike
Kiwi,
“I thought gender was social whereas sex was biological?”
You are correct which is obvious to anyone who isn’t bsing.
LikeLike
This is the crazy (pre) school I mentioned:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14038419
LikeLike
@ Michael Cooper
Hmm, Frederick Douglas had an entire career and role in public life, of disagreeing with the hypocrisy and racist practices of his nation.
Having said that, if you don’t want to explain why it is you think black athletes are more confident than white athletes, which is a strikingly curious thing to say, then, of course, you don’t have to explain it.
I think the real disagreeableness of the disagreement with you and George Ryder was that he used the word “dumb”, and mocked what you said. Maybe he shouldn’t have done that but as King mentioned to a former commenter we should make allowance for a certain amount of “slings and arrows”. What George said to you and how he said it were not the worst thing I’ve seen and not a big deal in their own right either.
LikeLike
@ Legion
What if I said, “White people and Black people have different roles to play out in society, they just do. White people and Black people have different roles to play out in social dynamics, they just do.”
How would you feel about that?
LikeLike
@ solesearch
I agree. I don’t support the sexual double standard, in any way. I see no reason why the bar should be lower for men. “Whore” should be an equal opportunity word that is just as applicable to men as to women.
It’s not obvious to me, and I’m not BSing.
But I’m open do debating it.
LikeLike
@ Paige
This is the thing with “battle of the sexes” and PC type analysis. It is not the case that one situation is instantly an analogue of some other situation. It is indefensible that people should be subordinated in every which way on the basis of skin colour. It is indefensible that division of labour should be based on skin colour. Men happen to be physically stronger (on average) than women. Therefore it hardly comes as a surprise that down through the ages men took on those tasks that required strength. Was it sexist to expect and demand that men go out and hunt for the tribe’s food?
Fathers are supposed to teach their sons a number of things, some of these things include strength of character, uprightness. Was it sexist of Abagond’s wife to ask of him to straighten out the dangerous quality developing in one of their sons*?
*”My wife told me to talk to him and punish him.” https://abagond.wordpress.com/2006/06/13/how-is-lying-cured/
LikeLike
@ Paige
What do you think about the preschool in Sweden?
LikeLike
King,
“It’s not obvious to me, and I’m not BSing.”
Gender is an act. The actions a gender takes is dictated by culture. Cultures change frequently and drastically, as opposed to biology. Sex is biological.
LikeLike
It may be generational differences; I’m quite young and wasn’t around to fish with Noah and rock climb with Moses so I will think differently; in 2014 things are changing. If this were not the case the Kim Ks would not be as socially acceptable as they are. S-x and the city came and conquered, things are changing. Schools discouraging girls from academic fields like science are being held accountable. Women are in every field more and more. And historically, women have been vulnerable to exploitation and are still relegated to being objects, so that whole what’s-good-for-you-thing is rubbish, it hasn’t benefited women; I don’t believe women are more valued. Respectability politics are just as s-xist when applied to women’s value as they are racist when applied to a race. There’s no such thing as girl things and boy things in social dynamics anymore. All I know is I don’t want White people telling me what to be, do or say for their approval, and I do not want men dictating who I am, what role I should play, and how to be a woman when you’ve never been one. My life doesn’t revolve around what strokes your ego, your ideals, your comfort levels, you don’t get to tell us what to do. No one’s life needs to be shaped and valued around what one group of people want, because privileged groups are no longer the dictators they think they are. No one should be asking or giving permission in 2014 because of the way they were born.
Great point Soulsearch.
King, you’re always sweet.
LikeLike
Women are in every field more and more.
Generally there is nothing wrong with that. It’s also to be expected as an economy modernizes more and more. I myself initially spoke to sexuality and sexual dynamics. Plenty of boy things and girl things in that area of human life.
LikeLike
Tone 1 and Point 1: Respectfully, It’s ironic when minorities who complain about racism and being treated differently turn and perpetuate…
Tone 2 and Point 2: It may be generational differences; I’m quite young and wasn’t around to fish with Noah and rock climb with Moses so I will think differently…
—————————————————————————————————-
There is, of course, no irony in having a more valid view of reality by virtue of one’s youth.
LikeLike
Here we go, we’re gonna point out all the socialised differences for justification. I disagree, and I mentioned female cultural s-xual revolution, you just took a piece from my post that didn’t touch on it, but did touch on physical strength having no say in most areas of modern society. Most differences are socialised. Black people have different muscle structures than White people, but it has been challenged when commenters have based the idea of differences between the two in sport to try and validate their bigotry, here. And using one families structure is confirmation bias. We’re still playing with nurtured ideas, not what’s natural.
And, I haven’t been “a rascal,” I joked with you that it’s frustrating going into moderation and you got offended about it, then I apologised for offending you even though I said nothing wrong.
LikeLike
Legion if my banter offends you despite many of your posts being harsh and your opinions passionate, you might as well skip mine. I was contributing my views to the conversation and not you in particular.
LikeLike
Cause it’s an old a55 way of thinking!
LikeLike
Whenever anyone starts patronising a minority group they’re not of on “how it is and how it/they should be,” one should expect some cheeky sarcasm. And present or past reality should not dictate what’s right or wrong when it’s a socialised reality. If that were the case, if we all lived by that way of thinking, life would be very different for Black people, right now.
LikeLike
To Legion
For one – I’m an African-American former athlete (HS and college football player; HS and college sprinter; HS and college high jumper; HS basketball player; and former amateur bodybuilder). On all levels I’ve seen the difference in confidence among black and white athletes. This is not to say that EVERY black athlete that I’ve known or encountered had/has the confidence or that EVERY white athlete that I’ve known or met lacked confidence. I’m merely generalizing, like our society does.
Confidence breeds relaxation in one’s ability to get the job done – as with Richard Sherman (in a team sport) or Muhammad Ali or Floyd Mayweather (in a one-man sport). Generally, black athletes are far more confident and relaxed under pressure. A good example was the Larry Holmes and Gerry Cooney fight of 1982. Cooney was definitely under mega-pressure by the media. The media had him as the next “Great White Hope” of pro boxing, which in my opinion was totally unfair. Although Holmes was the heavyweight champion of the world, which to some people is pressure alone, he was disrespectfully introduced before the challenger and underdog, Cooney. No problem. Larry Holmes won on confidence and relaxation, which Cooney didn’t have at all.
Interestingly, the vast majority of one-man sports show black athletes having sound confidence. In team sports that consist mostly of black athletes (i.e., black-dominated sports like basketball, football, and track relays) the load of confidence is dynamic. Again, I’m merely generalizing.
Unlike my generalization of black and white athletes, society’s generalization of the two athletes is often seen in fine print and, of course, 99.9% of the time black athletes compared to their white athletic counterparts are printed unfairly:
White athlete – hard worker
Black athlete – genetically gifted (or God-giving talent)
White athlete – disciplined
Black athlete – hard-headed
White athlete – unselfish
Black athlete – selfish (a showboat or old school term “hot dog”)
White athlete – modest
Black athlete – cocky
White athlete (pro level) – professional
Black athlete – (pro level) – unprofessional
I can go on and on.
Some of you commenters will disagree with me, but great black athletes like Muhammad “The Greatest” Ali, Dennis “Oil Can” Boyd, Craig “Mr. 3-Pointer” Hodges, “Marvelous” Marvin Hagler, Roger “the Mexican assassin” Mayweather, Floyd “Money” Mayweather, Richard “Captain Clutch” Sherman, LeBron “King” James, and a host of other black athletes know exactly what I’m talking about. Word!!
LikeLike
Ebony,
same to you.
LikeLike
To Legion
I don’t know George Ryder from the next unknown cat. He’s entitled to his opinion(s). His usage of the word “dumb” or “mocking” what I said doesn’t bother me at all. I’ve dealt with people’s poor choice of words throughout my entire life and I’m still breathing. I’m a black man raised in the gang-infested neighborhoods of California, so therefore I can handle anything. Besides, moms and pops taught their four children that “dumb” words don’t physically hurt you. A word like “dumb” is like dust particles to the Coopers. It’s all good with Mr. Ryder and myself. I have a blessed one. I’m out!
LikeLike
@Bulanik
People always pretend that women like Madonna and Cyrus are referred t o as “bold”, most of the time they are referred to as thrashy skanks and slutty. They don’t get a lot of respect.
@Kiwi
Martial artists don’t get a lot of respect nowadays, it’s more the MMA thing. Even Chuck Norris is treated more as a joke than a legitimate person to respect.
Doesn’t Hinduism have more of a class structured element to it than Buddhism? Not that I know much about either.
@Legion
You got a point; the black women might be rejected by her peers for being “white”.
@general
Women and being bossy…..women on a whole never consider that maybe they really are “bossy” and not just assertive, they never consider that maybe they lack social skills in whats considered appropriate for a professional setting.
They just assume that because people react negatively to their actions they must have a sexist reason for it.
Even when women hear that men prefer to have black female bosses over every other racial group, the women just assume that’s an aspect of how racist stereotypes can affect the view of women of different races. They never assume that black women’s unique experiences in life may make them better at leading and interacting with a wide range of people and social levels.
Because no way can a black women ever be better than a white woman at something. They can’t have a legitimate way of doing or thinking that maybe white women should look into.
LikeLike
Basically as Legion points out; this is more a strawman its an attempt to redefine something so as to try and have a greater legitimacy to their argument than as an honest statement.
LikeLike
@ solesearch
Except that I have now looked up quite a few sources, and none of them define Gender *exclusively* as an “act.”
Sure, the idea of learned social roles is PART of how Gender can be defined, but according to many sources, so can biology. I think there is a lot of overlap between the definitions. It’s not as discrete as you may think. That is why I cannot agree with statements that ignore half of the legitimate definitions of the words. My reading informs me that Sex and Gender can often be synonymous.
LikeLike
Gender roles have been repeatedly redefined throughout civilisation, switching back and forth according to the times, religious beliefs, culture and food sources. So, that doesn’t make any sense.
White people hold the Madonnas up as legends despite her career being founded on softp0rn and shock value. Janet accidentally showed her boob, her career is gone.
Big bums are thought of as ghetto, indeed . . .. at least until they’re on the likes of Jennifer Lopez.
Of course there are women who do not lead well, that doesn’t mean women aren’t given a hard time leading and don’t face an aversion to their leadership because of their s-x.
Yes the criminal clothing code has long been regarded as BM in baggy pants, sure there have been plently of criminals who have fit that discription, but it doesn’t mean innocent people who fit that describtion are never discriminated against. Profiling has long been regarded as and for good reason, (especially when it has been inflated with propaganda and not stats). So, that doesn’t make sense. Profiling doesn’t become right when applied to a s-x. This is all confirmation bias and just using silly excuses to say s-xism/misogyny doesn’t exist, or to validate it because a few women do blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
LikeLike
Last post was not in response to you, King.
LikeLike
Double standards are just how the majority justify their hegemony over the minority. It’s how the majority can cherry-pick through the best of minority cultures and present what they find as their own to the ovation of their peers. It’s locust-like behavior, except the locusts have the decency to be indiscriminate about what they ravage.
LikeLike
@Ebonymonroe: “Slow Clap” Thank You.
LikeLike
king,
What are your sources?
Here’s one that explains what I’m talking about:
http://www.who.int/gender/whatisgender/en/
“Sure, the idea of learned social roles is PART of how Gender can be defined, but according to many sources, so can biology. ”
How does biology define gender?
do you mean women wearing tampons(an act), because women menstruate?
I think I’d get your point better if you were more specific or gave some concrete examples.
LikeLike
Solesearch let me reply later when not on my ipad because it’s too much of a pain pulling quotes on this thing.
Ebonymonroe, Why are you attacking me??!!! 🙂
LikeLike
@King
I said my last post was NOT in response to yours, I was addressing the things V-4 said.
Further up, after our conversation yesterday, I also said even though we may not agree on prejudice towards s-x and race being the same thing, you’re ALWAYS SWEET. In other words, though we don’t see things the same way, that doesn’t mean I’m offended or that I dislike you. I have always liked ya.
Thank-you Mary and Soul
LikeLike
@Kiwi
“What I find puzzling is how this fascination with the Far East among white Westerners does not extend to nearly the same degree with browner civilizations such as those in South Asia or the Near East. Hinduism and Islam do not seem to receive the same amount of obsession from whites that the “less threatening” Buddhism does. In fact, Hinduism, Jainism, and especially Sikhism and Islam are seen as “the enemy’s” religion and their followers are feared for it.”
Your comments are usually astute but I think you are off the mark here. I think the appeal of Buddhism is unrelated to skin color. Buddha, while he was a high caste Shakya (a tribe of Scythian origin), he probably was quite brown himself. Many Buddhist principles are based on Hinduism and Buddha himself learnt from Hindu rishis. I think the distaste for Hinduism probably has to do with the caste system but there are areas of this country where people practice Hindu principles but don’t call it that. Sikhs have been misunderstood because they also wear turbans and grow beards like Muslims. The only religion thought of as “the enemy” is Islam and that is only because of 9/11.
LikeLike
@ V-4
@Legion
You got a point; the black women might be rejected by her peers for being “white”.
V-4 are you the person who claimed a few threads ago that the Native Americans were not targets of a successful campaign of genocide by The Founding Fathers and white society? If so, I can’t really see the point of discussing much of anything with you.
Secondly, my point, has been lost on you. I meant that the negative reaction from whites is less likely to be a “ghetto” label and more likely to be exclusion from alternative sub-culture. In other words, the reverse of what you are claiming I meant.
LikeLike
or attempted exclusion from alternative sub-culture.
LikeLike
@ Michael Cooper
Thanks for being more explicit on your observation, from your experience, about the quality of confidence between white and black athletes.
This is not to say that EVERY black athlete that I’ve known or encountered had/has the confidence or that EVERY white athlete that I’ve known or met lacked confidence. I’m merely generalizing…
Yes, I understood that. I don’t feel it’s necessary to carry out a scientific survey to confirm every intuition or general impression that I have either. When George Ryder brought up exhaustive person by person comparisons I think he was just going down more of the rocky road that had come up with you too. Anyone who is reasonable, understands that humans form general impressions out of their repeated experiences.
LikeLike
It’s all about keeping it 100. Thanks, Legion.
LikeLike
@Kiwi said:
“What I find puzzling is how this fascination with the Far East among white Westerners does not extend to nearly the same degree with browner civilizations such as those in South Asia or the Near East. Hinduism and Islam do not seem to receive the same amount of obsession from whites that the “less threatening” Buddhism does. In fact, Hinduism, Jainism, and especially Sikhism and Islam are seen as “the enemy’s” religion and their followers are feared for it.”
@ Minn Mom said:
“Your comments are usually astute but I think you are off the mark here. I think the appeal of Buddhism is unrelated to skin color. Buddha, while he was a high caste Shakya (a tribe of Scythian origin), he probably was quite brown himself. Many Buddhist principles are based on Hinduism and Buddha himself learnt from Hindu rishis. I think the distaste for Hinduism probably has to do with the caste system but there are areas of this country where people practice Hindu principles but don’t call it that. Sikhs have been misunderstood because they also wear turbans and grow beards like Muslims. The only religion thought of as “the enemy” is Islam and that is only because of 9/11.”
Kiwi responded:
“I don’t think the average white westerner knows as much about Buddhism as you do. In my experience, Buddhism is seen as an East Asian religion, not a South Asian one, despite its origins in India.”
***
Minn Mom doesn’t think this is about being seen as “browner” by white people, and I’d agree with her.
Any rejection on Hinduism is probably based on the caste system, rather than the complections of Asians that practice Hinduism.
Turban-wearing is also based on confusion. Haven’t Sikhs been mistaken — and attacked — for being Muslims, and aren’t Muslims (as well as defenders of them), as we know now, seen as “the enemy”?
(https://abagond.wordpress.com/2012/08/15/wade-michael-page/)
Perhaps it’s more a question of association and long development.
Much of what Buddha taught was interpreted in the Far East through exisitng traditions, and over many centuries. Just in the same way, the Christian religion developed in Europe, even though it came out of the Middle East.
Kiwi, I believe you agree with Phoebeprunelle’s point that the perception of different kinds of Asians depends on their skin colour. Is this correct?
Thus, the reason South Asian women aren’t fetishized as much as East Asian women, and South Asian men aren’t de-masculinised by as much as East Asian men — BY white people — is because South Asians are brown (sometimes very brown) and are therefore, according to the White Gaze — not seen as authentically “Asian” but closer to black.
Have I understood you properly?
Although I disagree with you on that (I believe that South Asians ARE fetishized / de-masculinised in similar ways due to their Asian-ness) I also believe there are associations made about South Asians due to having brown, or black, skin.
However, I have my doubts about how far this particular perception about “brown-ness” plays out when it comes to big religions within the Asian continent.
LikeLike
@ V-4
In saying this, you have missed my point. The “bold” I was referring to was Western pop stars taking up India’s religious symbols, and making them into fashion accessories. Fashion statements tend to be bold to stand out.
You are talking about something else.
I’d prefer if you didn’t take up my comments to make your points in this way.
LikeLike
@ Ebony, oh, you had me chuckling along here for a moment:
No, this Man-is-the-Hunter imagery hasn’t benefitted women.
And when Mack said: Double standards are just how the majority justify their hegemony over the minority. It’s how the majority can cherry-pick through the best of minority cultures and present what they find as their own to the ovation of their peers… …it reminds me it doesn’t have to be about racialized “majority” and “minority” cultures when it comes to the sexes because the trick is pretty much the same.
I wasn’t around in Noah’s time either, so I have to stand back when the Man-is-the-Hunter theories are expressed as somehow more obvious or more obviously sensible and obviously universal counters to PC analyses.
What it does speak to is who one thinks is more more important.
The argument is not whether there were division of labour for male and females. That’s not it.
Rather it was, as you say that: Gender roles have been repeatedly redefined throughout civilisation, switching back and forth according to the times, religious beliefs, culture and food sources. So, that doesn’t make any sense.
There are variables and shifting perceptions. Perception had everything to do with how we think about it NOW.
What has happened here is that “Man-the-Hunter” image centre-stage — he’s the one killing the beast and providing.
The weaker female, well…she scrapes the hide and fiddles with secondary, side-show dribs and drabs.
Yet would the hunter-foragers have survived without storage and processing technologies, or child-care for that matter?
This is PERCEPTION, perception about who is strong and important.
Hunting is seen as big, important and heroic. It is romanticised, along iwth clubs and spears.
Foraging, though, is not romanticised, or heroic.
Agricultural tools used by women are not usually cast as the implements of those blessed with prowess or strength.
Or as an activity that contributed more than half of the food eaten by all.
Also downplayed was that everyone worked together to find and process food.
Humans are ominivores and although “hunting” was a feature of survival among pre-historic nomads, scavenging for meat and foraging for other foods was no less so, and that wasn’t only or always about the male strength. It might have been more about “Protecting the Infants”, rather than exposing the future of a group to the danger of hunting and predators.
If family groups were near a water source, the women would dive (they made fitter divers due to fat stores in the female body) for the most valued of food.
In more agriculturally-centred settings, it might have “Woman-the-Agriculturalist”, instead of The Hunter figure, with men being seen as more “expendable” if they were lost during a dangerous pursuit, like hunting.
And of course, women and men would hunt together, and use dogs to help them do it.
LikeLike
@ Ebony, when i mention women and men hunting together with dogs, I wanted to add that was not as common, but not unheard of either.
LikeLike
@Bulanik
You’re my hero. (Applause.) There have been so many different eras throughout civilisation in terms of gender roles according to food sourcing and who’s the stay at home parent, religious deity, economic advantage, royalty and politics, that looking at our time and holding it up as what is right and natural is only a matter of convenience for the continued domination of the currrnt hegemony.
@Kiwi
I was speaking more to significant social and s-xual dynamics that are in transition. But even in terms of apparel, a few decades ago, it would not have been acceptable for women to wear pants, for men to wear pink shirts, for male rockers to wear makeup and nail polish.
LikeLike
@ Legion
Which preschool in Sweden?
I’m not sure why you mention the fact that most men are physically stronger than most women when I was talking about the fact that men are typically allotted more social leeway in regard to to promiscuity. I’m also not sure what Abagond’s wife asking him to talk to their son has to do with anything. Women and men can both teach children; many married couples work as a team. Maybe in Abagond’s family he is better than his wife at meting out punishments, but in many families, such as my own, it’s a task that more often falls to the mother. Abagond even considered asking his female family members for advice: “I should ask my mother. She might know what he would have done. Or what I should do. And my sister too – she has done far
more reading and thinking on child rearing than I have.”
LikeLike
@Kiwi
“However, Indian Americans are the only Asian ethnicity whose men are more likely to marry out than the women. This is in stark contrast to all East Asian and Southeast Asian ethnicities, whose women are more likely to marry out than the men.”
Again, I have to disagree with you because it’s not borne out by facts. Here’s the data from Asian Nation website.
http://www.asian-nation.org/interracial.shtml
If you look at US raised Indian women vs. men, Indian women marry whites at the rate of 37.8% while it’s 25.6% for Indian men. Shockingly, this rate is higher than that of even Chinese women. Secondly, only 52% of Indian women marry other Indians while 62% of the men marry other Indians. And this discrepancy would be greater if not for the intense pressure that Indian parents place on their daughters to only marry other Indians.
LikeLike
@Kiwi
“Buddhism is seen as an East Asian religion, not a South Asian one, despite its origins in India.”
You’re right that Buddhism is seen more as East Asian rather than South Asian. But I think that’s because Buddhism is non existent in India. Following the death of King Ashoka who had successfully supplanted Hinduism with Buddhism in India, the many Indian monarchies and the upper castes conspired to eradicate Buddhism from India as they saw it as a threat to their supremacy.
LikeLike
@Kiwi
As a quick and dirty, albeit unscientific test, one can do a quick google search for “Asian porn” (“Asian” is understood to mean “East Asian” in the US) vs. “Indian porn” or “Arab porn” or “Persian porn” etc.. I do not see white men getting it on with South Asian women at the same obsessive frequency that they do with East Asian women. This disparity in media representation certainly reflects a differential racial outlook among whites in regard to East Asians vis-à-vis other Asians.
I agree that different Asians are seen in different ways, and I feel your general points are spot-on. After all, you do say that “it goes well beyond mere skin color”.
Imo, other kinds of Asians — Indians, Persians, Arabs — are seen as another kind of “exotic” — at once “samey” and interchangeable, but also more feared, misunderstood, ignored or laughed at, in turns.
For me, though, the “disparity in media attention” is telling for the reason that it’s East and Southeast Asians women, among Asian women, who’re the object of so much fetish and over-sexualization by white men and white-owned porn businesses. But, I do not believe the “popularity” of these women is due to their skin colour.
If indeed this was a case of light skin colour — and a prejudice or preference –by the white men who create and control media representations, then why aren’t East and Southeast Asians the top movie stars in Western countries, in large numbers — AND why aren’t they far, far more represented in mainstream tv, as well? Their numbers in movies and tv should be much greater — yet, I think blonde white women seem to be “the flavour” on much Western tv.
I noticed this in US tv.
But as far as East and Southeast Asian women go, it’s the porn niche of the media industry that this “obsessive frequency” turns up.
To me, that’s more telling.
I don’t mean to say that a light skin colour is not “helpful” for any racialized individual who wants to pursue a career in film or television. That goes not just for “Western” countries, but in many countries, too, as colourism is alive and kicking, as we know.
I simply believe coloursim cuts across the board for any non-white woman in white-dominated media. I recall Abagond featuring a guest post from Ankhesen Mié, titled “Um…It Ain’t About Us”, in which the author says:
LikeLike
Correction: the first paragraph is Kiwi’s quote and should have been in blockquotes.
LikeLike
@ Minn Mom
I have met someone from India who was a Buddhist. What she said was that Buddhists are a religious minority in India, but there are more of them there than there are Jains.
LikeLike
Minn Mom, I don’t how up-to-date the figures are, but according to this website, there are about 7 million Budhhists in India. Sri Lanka has around 12 and a half million Buddhists. (I wonder why there are so many Buddhists there compared to India?)
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/history/bstatt10.htm
LikeLike
@Bulanik
“For me, though, the “disparity in media attention” is telling for the reason that it’s East and Southeast Asians women, among Asian women, who’re the object of so much fetish and over-sexualization by white men and white-owned porn businesses. But, I do not believe the “popularity” of these women is due to their skin colour.”
I don’t want to delve much in these issues but I have a few thoughts (food for thought):
* (this is simply an hypothesis) The main reason I believe such fantasies exist in a portion of White men probably is related to the recent wars in that part of Asia where many White men went as soldiers and a specific kind of relationship developed between them and local women. Those experiences passed as stories which captured the imagination of many other men (friends, etc) who never were there themselves but longed to be there or have a woman from there. I remember, before I went to Germany in the 80’s, hearing the stories of other older friends who were there before and described how hot and uncomplicated those blonde “Frauen” were. The desire to sense something similar developed in this way.
* (this is simply an opinion) South Asian, Arab women and other at that region of Asia are manifestly more similar in general appearance to White women than East Asia women. If there is an implicit desire of White men to have children (if things go as far) as closer to their own appearance as possible, but with women from a different race, than South Asian and Arab women should be first choice. But maybe historic events pushed to a different choice…
* (and yet another opinion) Cultural barriers possibly make an approximation from an outside man to an South Asian or Arab woman more difficult (perception?).
LikeLike
@ munu aka Bantu
[my emphasis]
I am inclined to believe this is a powerful element in the resultant fetishization.
LikeLike
@Bulanik
Thanks for that link. I was surprised to learn that there are many more Buddhists than Jains in India as I know many Indian Jains but not Buddhists. Also there are many prominent Jains in the US.
BTW, who’s the person on your avatar?
LikeLike
@ Paige
The preschool mentioned here:
I’m also not sure what Abagond’s wife asking him to talk to their son has to do with anything. Women and men can both teach children; many married couples work as a team.
I prefaced what I was getting at when mentioning the disciplining situation in Abagond’s home. The preface was this:
“Fathers are supposed to teach their sons a number of things, some of these things include strength of character, uprightness.”
——————-
Yeah, of course women and men can both teach children. What I said in my “preface” didn’t even hint that I think otherwise.
LikeLike
@Paige
(Ebonymonroe might want to read it too, or not)
Paige said:
Abagond even considered asking his female family members for advice: “I should ask my mother. She might know what he would have done. Or what I should do. And my sister too – she has done far
more reading and thinking on child rearing than I have.”
Um, okay, so he was going to get advice from his mother, that’s great. If you’re trying to imply that I don’t value women, you’re being cliché and barking up the wrong tree.
Ultimately, it would have been Abagond himself directly disciplining his boy on this lying issue. I think there can be a difference in the weight that a kid gives to the disciplining or instruction that they get from a parent depending on what is being addressed. It’s not just a blank, colorless affair that some people want to, in their ever so modern thinking, claim it is. Am I saying something that is not patently obvious? Am I saying something sexist? Am I demonstrating old ass thinking?
Consider the following scenario. Whom do we expect is more ideally suited to instruct a daughter about how to deal, hygiene wise and psychological/emotional wise, with their menstrual cycle when it first appears? A father? Could he provide useful instruction? Yes, he could, but what is more ideal? Probably receiving counsel, support and guidance from the mother on that issue is more ideal. When I mentioned sex roles earlier, this example is the sort of thing that fits under sex roles. Hell, the daughter could probably seek out her own instruction on the internet but again what is more ideal?
————————————————————————————————–
I’m also not sure what Abagond’s wife asking him to talk to their son has to do with anything. Women and men can both teach children; many married couples work as a team.
^ Please, can we drop the fashionable PC and have a real examination? No one has to agree with me, I don’t care about that; my model of the world has to work for me, it doesn’t have to work for anyone else. But the PC filter is like white people thinking they know how to see properly through a white lens.
Married couples work as a “team”? What does that mean? Married couples work along lines of division of labour (I can’t think of a less dry way of putting it.) To my mind, married couples share tasks and probably often do it on the basis of the demonstrated strengths and inherent attributes of each partner.* In the example with the newly menstruating daughter, if the family is still intact, it seems clear which spouse has the strengths and attributes best suited to aiding their daughter in that time of development.
———————-
(* Sometimes the lion’s share of child rearing may go to one spouse because of a bond that the child has with that parent, that simply never developed as it should have with the other parent.)
LikeLike
@ Minn Mom
Thank you: I had no idea that Jains were prominent among Asians in the US.
I just (wrongly) assumed that their numbers were too small for that to be so.
The person in my avatar is Rajshree Thakur, newsreader and tv actor from Mumbai: http://www.santabanta.com/gallery/bollywood-parties/gold-awards-pre-event-party/rajshree-thakur/157633/
Re the avatar, skip to last sentence here :
LikeLike
@ Ebonymonroe
I was a jerk, not in this thread though:
LikeLike
And in case it wasn’t obvious, I’m pretty sure menstruation qualifies as a “girl thing” despite the confident assertion by Ebonymonroe that there are no longer boy things and girl things.
LikeLike
It’s fine. Never any hard feelings with me.
False parallel if there ever was one. Discipline has no specification when it comes to a biological s-x while menstruation obviously does. Your tying discipline to the male s-x is completely culturally relative and relevant to our time. You’re picking at straws with these vastly different circumstances as an argument. The point is not that nothing is considered a boy thing or a girl thing, but that the considerations are social constructs that have shifted from one eras
in civilisation to the next and culture to culture, meaning it’s not innate and nothing but your nurtured worldview says it is. I can think of cases where the son was scared of his mum while the father was the softy and the nurture parent. It’s purely down to individual, culture and time.
LikeLike