Monday, July 27, 2009

Women Versus Men ... Again

The following is supposedly attributed to Charlotte Whitton, a well known Canadian feminist.


Whatever women do they must do twice as well as men to be thought half as good. Luckily, this is not difficult.

I can imagine being part of an audience of mixed gender and observing good natured amusement following this statement. It is meant to be funny, and it is funny in a way. I would let it go with the same mirth as one would, “Take my wife. … Please!” uttered by a former comedian.

If I had to pit my wit against a clever woman, I would likely lose eight out of ten matches. I would similarly lose eight out of ten matches against a clever man. Smarts, wisdom, wit, strength of character, and so forth, are not a product of genitalia. They are endowed by the DNA and then the rest is up to the parents who made or allowed the person to evolve, including nutrition and lack of exposure to lead, DDT, and other detrimental effects including measles.

I am not really wandering all over the place without clear point: women are not better nor worse then men. Anyone trying to prove otherwise is fighting a Quixotic and useless battle. This is where feminism fails the cause. It is pitting women against men for a bad reason. It alienates members on all sides, female, male, feminist, anti-feminists, and so on.

The cause in behalf of women should point out their potential for greatness, rather than pointing out the stupidity of men. We, men, acknowledge that some of us are stupid, and all of us act stupid from time to time. In addition, I speak only for myself here, I observe that some women are stupid, and many act stupid sometimes. My conclusion on this limited observation is that women and men are very much alike in this respect.

Anybody can come up with a counter example to dispute the generality that I have presented. Fine. I can come with another to dispute your dispute ad nauseam. That is trivial and it will get us nowhere. What is important is to avoid arbitrary claims, artificial limits, and false assumptions.

Any position, be it family, community, education, political, and others, should be filled by one who is able to obtain it through his or her merits. By the same reasoning, no person should be denied a position because of gender. Exceptions apply when they must, but not arbitrarily based on gender.

If you have the impression that I am patriarchal and anti-feminist, you are right. I am also matriarchal. Mostly, I love women, and wish for them to be what and who they want to be. I do all I can to make that possible. Just as I did all I could to make it possible for my daughters and sons to be their best.

A female in charge of a marriage is a wonderful thing. But she does not work alone. She needs support. The same goes for when a man is in charge. The problem is when the wrong gender is in charge. That is the reason for many failed marriages. Those of you reading this blog are likely to prefer Female Led Relationships. I do, and it may be for a selfish reason. It is because I am married to a woman, and also of my kinky feeling of wanting to give up my constant, nagging, weighing burden of responsibility for everything that goes on around me. I am not into threesomes or homosexuality as a choice, but even another man being in charge would release some of my burden. If my wife wants to take over and do all that I do, hey, I am all for it! Honey, you have the helm. Good luck.

The problem is, I cannot retire from life until I am dead. I am the person with the muscle to repair the roof, fix the sump pump, and take out the garbage. She, my queen, can still lead, and I wish that she does forever, but I cannot thrust my position to someone who is unable to handle it. So we each do what we can. She is good at what she does, the rest falls into my lap, as it should. She knows how to vacuum and mop, but I do it because of my strength and love. If she wants to change something, we try and see whether it works. Feminism does not affect our arrangement. Reality does.

5 comments:

subservient-husband said...

gees, touch the third rail much? ;-})

In my WLM, my wife is superior in almost every aspect. Socially, economically, parentally, intelligence, good looks, literary skills, and a whole host of others. All of these I freely admit. As such there are many day-to-day practical benefits to having her in charge of decision making. Also, as an added prize, something in me causes a pleasure mechanism to engage when her authority is exercised over me. This is not the same for when other people engage some form of authority over me. Just the woman I love. I do not know why I am like this with her. When her needs are placed above mine and when her authority is exerted over me, I am content.

As to broader philosophical discussions on gender leadership roles, I can not really speak to, as I do not have a formed opinion, nor do I feel I need to form one. On my own relationship with my wife I do have an opinion and she is superior. I would encourage a husband to approach his wife if he feels as I do. The transition has so many benefits and all but no down sides.

Susan's Pet said...

Not really. I am not that touchy at all. I would love my wife to be the way you describe yours. Then again, I love her the way she is. We all are different, and if I were in your position, I would likely not be as satisfied as you.

I am not a rabied anti feminist. I just like to see and say things the way they are, based on observation. That is as opposed to the way we wish or dictate they were. I am sure that you, too, have an opinon. Maybe you have not expressed it because you feel that you are not entitled to one. Trust me, you are entitled to an opinion! You may be a total devoted person to your wife, but you are a fully functional person. You probably vote in local, state, and national elections, you are definitely worth an opinon.

Miss Jaye said...

I like your insight, that both men and women are equal in the ratio of intelligence as well as stupidity.
I am forever embarrassed by my own gender when I observe or spend time (which I try not to do because I find stupidity attached to either genitalia a waste of time)with females who a) act stupid as a means of manipulation or b) believe their lacking intelligence is made up for by their abundance of breasts.
I am also proud of those of my gender who are changing the world for the better be it through politics, the law, social organizations or by raising their children to be contributing citizens.
My only disagreement with you is that the goal of all feminists is to degrade the status of males and if I may introduce you to another theory of feminism it is the belief women and men should be equally respected.
I am a feminist but not one that believes women are superior to men but one that believes a female can be equal to a male, as they can be equal to a female and are not superior.
I agree completely we all need support especially to be equal.
One of my favorite quotes was said by a man regarding Ginger Rogers; "Sure [Fred Astaire] was great...but don't forget Ginger Rogers did everything he did backwards . . . and in high heels!"
Women are still living to expectations that men have long been release from, so although we are not superior, we are expected to be so just to be recognized as equal.

Susan's Pet said...

Dear Miss Jaye,

I agree with all you have said. I love the quote from Ginger Rogers. It is very appropriate. Compared with her Fred Astair is overrated. Then again, I love females, so my opinion is tainted.

I like to give credit where it is due. Mostly it is in the home where the woman stays and makes a life for her children where the man who impregnated her, with or without her approval, is gone from the scenario.

On a grander scale, I admire women of global achievement: Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher, and more. They rose to heights that were nearly impossible to men, and they had more to overcome.

subservient-husband said...

I am well educated holding both an undergrad & grad. My wife as well. I have well formed opinions on many things for which I have no problem engaging in exchanges for which I consider myself skilled at maintaining my view while keeping an open mind. This question on gender leadership from an anthropology standpoint is not something I have cared to form an opinion on.

I do believe that woman could not use WLM techniques al la BF Skinner on every man. I believe it takes a pre-existing bio-chemistry / emotional makeup in the husband for it to work. Subjugation through skinneristic approaches lead to discontent and friction because the will is at odds. The theory that will can be completely molded through conditioned response has been all but discarded from the psychology profession. For instance, the only citizens happy under authoritarian governments such as Mao tse Tung, Joseph Stalin, and Hitler were those who agreed with the government. Others, who lived in fear, were not content, no matter how much fear or other conditioned responses were applied. It takes desire from within the individual to be content under the authority of another. For me that occurs with my wife, but not just contentment with her leadership. For me it goes even further. I have some bio-chemical response to when her authority is exerted. My breath quickens, my heart rate increases, and I feel peace. I believe this is some endorphin release, but I have not studied this nor do I know why I am this way. I do not believe every husband is the same and therefore WLM techniques are not able to be universally applied, IMHO.