Post #110,674
7/21/03 9:59:37 AM
7/21/03 10:00:46 AM
|
That was a Mars/Venus foo reference. Too subtle, I suppose.
and left me wide open for a sophomoric jibe.
I've never read Gray's Venus/Mars books, but a friend of mine (a male, actually the pilot with an airplane in the hangar next to mine) summed up one of the theories put forth in those books as follows:
"It's like this. For simplicity, let's say that we keep a point system that indicates in how much good favor we hold one another. One evening I come over to the airport and I see you putting your plane back in the hangar. I help you push it in. I get 1 "one" point. The next day I come by your house and I see you digging a hole in your backyard by hand and I ask what you're doing. You tell me you're digging a hole for a new swimming pool. I run home, get my shovel and we spend the next three days digging that hole by hand. When finished, I run out and buy some beer for us to share. You get to thinking, 'Man, he really worked his tail off for me and then went and bought us refreshments.' Then you give me 100,000 points. Okay, now you bring home a flower for your wife. You get 1 "one" point. The next day you take out the garbage, cook dinner, wash the dishes, clothes and mop the floor. You get 1 "one" point. Then your wife wants you to take a job that pays a lot better but that you despise so that she can buy a new mink coat. You do that, you're willing to do something for the next 20 years that you despise so that she can have what she wants. You get 1 "one" point. With your wife, you always only get 1 "one" point without regard to the scale of what you have done. Men will assign points based upon the scale of what is done, women don't."
That is what I was talking about. A point too subtle and not well enough articulated. I just thought that as popular as Gray's books have been some one might have caught it. That has been my experience with women, they give out points one at a time and take them away in blocks of 50.
As w/all things, YMMV.
bcnu,
Mikem
The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice and always has been...We have thrown away the most valuable asset we had-- the individual's right to oppose both flag and country when he (just he, by himself) believed them to be in the wrong. We have thrown it away; and with it all that was really respectable about that grotesque and laughable word, Patriotism.
- Mark Twain, "Monarchical and Republican Patriotism"
Edited by mmoffitt
July 21, 2003, 10:00:46 AM EDT
|
Post #110,726
7/21/03 4:11:54 PM
|
I still disagree with the major premise -
now rendered clearer by your example.
"They only give one point". Though it would 'prove' nothing (like those silly Mars/Venus books) - I can think of events where, simply one small act, spontaneous! (not premeditated 'for effect'- like flowers yada yada) - has been remembered for a lifetime. + OR -. Spontaneity reveals, most often: What Really (You Are Like).
The generalizations are simply too flawed and too broad. Ex: The idea of character, for just one. Your pilot guy quantifies this in a Guy-way (while we're foolishly generalizing). This is the essence of 'digital-think', methinks.
A typ female (while we're foolishly generalizing) - tends to evaluate, and also re-evaluate character - which is a Quality-type characteristic, not Quantity. One Courageous Act! can easily render meaningless.. a bevy of annoying habits of the day-day kind. This is the kind of stuff IMhO - more women Get.. than Men, in my entire experience. (A euphemism always used: "girls mature socially faster than boys" == that ain't the HALF of it!)
CPAs, Repos, those with Only-'techno' training (which many mistake to be an EdjaKayshun, in recent decade) - love to reduce the unfathomable complexities of life events and of every separate personality: into {ugh} numbers. The Spreadsheet is the litmus: find who Loves That -?- and you gots yer Faith in Quantities over the {ugh} Quality/environment! produced by focussing on. bottom. lines. Period. {cha cha cha}
Betrayal too, is about that character-thing - what's the latest divorce rate? A number-besotted partner never Can fathom Why it is: he/she has decided that she/he is no longer to be Trusted (to give a rather common example of guaranteed miscommunication - thus creating the Blame Game). "My wife/husband doesn't understand me". Thus sayest they.
Boys are too busy (just being sure they Are 'busy') while growing up, racing around with mechanical toys etc. - to ever stop and smell those archetypal Roses. Being alone: primal fear - but much more-so in boys. Note how little value our (male-dominated) culture places upon Solitude!. QED
But girls have smelled the Roses from Day1. (and of course there are the usual Gaussian Exceptions - even 180\ufffd) When I seek a character assessment (corroboration or correction) - I know where I'll go First - and generally it won't be to a motorcycle 'buddy'. Or a CPA of any gender. Or - -
Ashton
PS - IMO, a major part of the visceral hatred of wanna-be Macho Guys\ufffd VS Queers: is that the "interior decorator" stereotype connotes much more than just an appreciation for color, shapes, Art! in a life - it also means a much greater ability to communicate (!) with Regular Females, for having acquired such sensibilities. There is always Envy behind irrational [hah] Hatred. But I digress - so won't dredge of a local story illustrating this phenom. (And yes, I Have come to accept that the male-chromosome is inherently 'organically defective' - and It Shows. cf WARZ.)
|
Post #110,774
7/21/03 8:13:07 PM
|
I can't agree.
I understand your point and am inclined to agree on the whole. However, even considering that we are muttling up the situation with generalizations that cannot in any real sense speak to the reality, I think it unfair to say that being unable to understand the intricacies of female thought is a result of applying a spreadsheet mentality to it. It might be more fair to say that human relationships do not abide by deductive reasoning. That may be what you are saying when you emphasize "assigning numbers", but I'd argue it is not the same thing. "Assigning numbers" is an -GAG!- application.
Find a woman who will be happy to hear "Come, let us reason together" and you have found an unusual one, if not unique!
It is a fair criticism, imo, to say that too much emphasis on reason blocks an appreciation of a genuine life. But in my experience, very little of a woman's conclusions about anything are based upon an application of logic. To be sure, they "feel" more than we do, on the whole. The trouble is in trying to understand them, you must abandon your normal approach of studying the facts, agreeing on premises, applying logic and coming to a conclusion and instead try to figure out how a position makes you "feel". "Does that make sense?" is how, I think, most men look at anything while "How do I feel about that?" is the approach most women take.
On the whole, men who try to "figure women out" fail because of their method. They apply reason as the means to figuring them out and reason, on the whole, does not apply to the way a woman thinks.
Of course, this discussion has diluted into sweeping generalizations. But most, of course not all, women I've known fit the above.
bcnu,
Mikem
The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice and always has been...We have thrown away the most valuable asset we had-- the individual's right to oppose both flag and country when he (just he, by himself) believed them to be in the wrong. We have thrown it away; and with it all that was really respectable about that grotesque and laughable word, Patriotism.
- Mark Twain, "Monarchical and Republican Patriotism"
|
Post #110,780
7/21/03 8:50:14 PM
|
Both 'decide' emotionally. Proof:
Eureka!
In the end (we often think.. via merely "logical processes") we always do what we Want to do. Then the rationalizations rush in to justify Why 'it felt right'. Ad infinitum (it's a Tritium-fueled generator)
Talk to a female who plays cards (well!) sometime - about that simple ol' Boolean logic. Anyway, guess I've encountered a few more brilliant ones than you have.
Besides, we started out with the very large idea of Scale - which, I think evades cute all-in-one definitions even more artfully than the infinitely malleable social myths du jour. We may as well give it up. Nice try though.
Ashton
As Thea once opined, upon hearing a recitation of a particular doomed homo-sap exchange,
What if the subject.. just didn't.. come up?
(And no, I can't 'explain' why - that was an utterly Al Punte description of the whole enchilada. 'Scale', you know.. ;-)
|
Post #110,782
7/21/03 9:08:18 PM
|
We are all a bag of
snot, crap, piss, gall, bile, water, secretia and slikums wrapped in a punturable bag with appendages attached that provide entertainment and communication. Now men will react in certain ways due to hanging with other little boys so a group of disimularly brought up men can interact effectively. An example. At Beep's Party at the pool there was a throwing in of bodies. The men who were first dropped in were FOB's, the rest of us quickly saw it wasnt terribly violent, a little pushing and shoving and a drenching. The other visitors adapted to the local rules and got wet. In other parties I have been the first attempt would have started a knife fight with a little shooting on the side. All the men adapted. Now we turn to women. Men just know that their appendages are fun to play with (hetro anyway) and we constantly engage with the end result of playing with these appendages. This provides a poor communication channel as the women realize that all communications from men are overt and covert positioning. That is why Gay men get along with women quite well. The secondary signal path is out of the way. I have met women who I can quickly communicate that fun can be had, but not right this minute and have us both set aside that 2 channel communication.
Of course with My wife that is impossible, as most married men will attest that true one channel comms can only be achieved while a man is eating dinner or post coital for about 8 minutes or usual recharge time. So in conclusion, men communicate better with other men and with women with dificulty.
thanx,
bill
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #110,804
7/21/03 11:33:06 PM
|
Re: We are all a bag of
I used to imagine I could communicate with women, but now I find it impossible and don't think I was ever able to do it. However, I am always getting better at communicating with animals. The less you talk, the less you rely on it.
-drl
|
Post #110,834
7/22/03 6:39:14 AM
|
Wolves are fascinating.
As I encounter a friend's pair (mixed and one pure) and see movies of their 'training' of a pup .. and see how I am greeted, as I become familiar --
(Y'know, ya gotta, just once in a while - lick-back on Their nose! too) And you can see the delight in the eyes and expression:
Hey! this dim-witted humanoid Gets It... kinda. They mean a lot by those gestures and, the subtlety they telgraph is amazing, when you pay close attention. And the loyalty.
A.
|
