gay vikings- could it be true...

[milomorris]

Viewing that there are some traits specific to one sex is a conceit as well. 

Women are nurturing?  Well, so are men.
Men are brave?  Well, so are women.
Women want families?  Well, so do men.
Men are strong?  Well, so are women.

Good point. At the same time, its important to understand that some traits carry more weight with one gender than the other. For example, if a man is not very nurturing, nobody really thinks twice about it. If a woman lacks this trait, people think there is something out-of-sorts with her.

[Monika]

Right. And as I have said before, it comes down to a matter of where a man's balance point is. Like it or not, society places boundaries on masculinity and femininity. Men and women who cross those boundaries cause friction.

I love friction. Bring it on.

[Monika]

Not "femininity," Clyde, "effeminacy." The two words are different. See Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: fem·i·nine
Function: adjective

1: female 1a(1)
2: characteristic of or appropriate or unique to women <feminine beauty> <a feminine perspective>

and


Main Entry: ef·fem·i·nate
Function: adjective

1 : having feminine qualities untypical of a man : not manly in appearance or manner
2 : marked by an unbecoming delicacy or overrefinement <effeminate art> <an effeminate civilization>


So you see, a woman is feminine. A man can be effeminate.

  Effeminate is a ridiculous term. I mean, exactly what qualities are untypical of men?
Or exactly what qualities make men less manly? 

[Clyde-B]

Viewing that there are some traits specific to one sex is a conceit as well. 

Women are nurturing?  Well, so are men.
Men are brave?  Well, so are women.
Women want families?  Well, so do men.
Men are strong?  Well, so are women.

Absolutely! 

One can wonder why people even create these bogus "standards" to begin with.  What purpose do they serve?  Are people expected to all act alike?  Or is the motivation to try and give certain people some kind of perceived advantage over others? 

Not only do the "standards" vary from culture to culture and within a culture over time, but nobody adheres to the "standards" 100% or even tries to.  Most people just relax and be themselves.

   

[milomorris]

One can wonder why people even create these bogus "standards" to begin with.  What purpose do they serve?  Are people expected to all act alike?  Or is the motivation to try and give certain people some kind of perceived advantage over others?  

I don't see what del posted as being "standards," but rather as trends or tendencies. These things do have value. For example, in the educational world, we are made aware that boys & girls learn differently, and therefore need different types of attention from teachers. Another example is in the corporate world: diversity/sensitivity trainers teach us that men and women often prioritize differently, and have divergent approaches to problem-solving. The point of the training is to make us aware of the differences so that we can better understand each other, and don't miss out on the value that a person of the opposite gender brings to the table.

[Clyde-B]

I don't see what del posted as being "standards," but rather as trends or tendencies. These things do have value. For example, in the educational world, we are made aware that boys & girls learn differently, and therefore need different types of attention from teachers. Another example is in the corporate world: diversity/sensitivity trainers teach us that men and women often prioritize differently, and have divergent approaches to problem-solving. The point of the training is to make us aware of the differences so that we can better understand each other, and don't miss out on the value that a person of the opposite gender brings to the table.

Why not take the time to get to know the individuals you are dealing with?  People create these "trends" and "tendencies" because it gives them a product to sell to others.  Books, seminars, lecture tours, it's become an industry.  It can also help create the false idea in people that they should themselves comply with these "trends" and "tendencies" whether the "trends" and "tendencies" fit them or not.

It would seem the most accurate results would be achieved by dealing with individuals as they are, not by playing the odds.

It may be a valid curiosity to ask how men and women are different.  The real answer may be - not much.  But I think that assuming we have the definitive answer already is mistaken.

[milomorris]

Why not take the time to get to know the individuals you are dealing with? 

The business analyst side of me says that is an inefficient use of resources. Frequently--very frequently at Verizon--I found myself working with teams in various parts of the country on projects. We always had tight deadlines to meet. There was not always time for face-to-face meetings. In that kind of high-pressure, fast-paced environment, there is no time to get know anybody. So leaning on trends & tendencies, along with plain old professional conduct, was about the best we could do.   

People create these "trends" and "tendencies" because it gives them a product to sell to others.  Books, seminars, lecture tours, it's become an industry. 

Incorrect. Marketers do not create the trends & tendencies, we identify and measure them. They are created organically among groups of people. Once we have them identified and measured, then we figure out how to sell products.

It can also help create the false idea in people that they should themselves comply with these "trends" and "tendencies" whether the "trends" and "tendencies" fit them or not.

To the extent that trends & tendencies translate into social codes, compliance, non-compliance, and the risks & benefits of each are managed by societies and each individual's interaction with their society.

[bailey1205]

Hasn't all this been covered, over , and over, and over again?

Trend, schmend.

 

[Sheriff Roland]

Moderator comment:

Just as important, all of this is WAY off topic.

If the subject at hand (gay vikings) is not getting discussed, perhaps this thread needs to be split. But then what you all are discussing HAS already be hashed out over and over again in Current Events and Safe Haven. So maybe this thread needs to be locked?

And it's always the same 3 or 4 people who contribute to the endless cycle.

Can't you'all just get along? Or at least play in dif'rent parts of the school yard.

sheriff roland

[milomorris]

Can't you'all just get along? Or at least play in dif'rent parts of the school yard.

You know, this thread was humming along quite nicely with a very interesting historical topic and then BLAM!!...Jeff came in and dropped androphilia on the table, and yet another feeding frenzy began. I'm not going to sit idly by and let misconceptions, mischaracterizations, misunderstandings, accusations, and flat-out lies about me or androphilia go unchallenged. This same scenario has been repeated over and over again here at Bettermost, and I always get blamed for hijacking threads.

So here's a suggestion: the next time anyone wants to go a few rounds with me on androphilia, drop your challenge in the Gay Identity thread where it belongs. Don't interrupt the flow of someone else's thread just to take pot-shots at me.