domination isn’t egalitarian.

“It means a democrat voting law graduate and high income earning caring, non predjuduce women will marry a guy like me without judging me on what degree I have or what job I do.”

Do they? Will they? I don’t think that is the trend now.

It means a democrat voting law graduate and high income earning caring, non predjuduce women will marry a guy like me without judging me on what degree I have or what job I do.

I can not wait.

In many larger cities and on the coast, housing prices are so high that both partners have to work to afford the mortgage. Increase in freedom from the single earner household of 30 years ago? Maybe for the bankers that collect mortgage interest, certainly not for the rest of us.

Aggression? Gee Maureen, I guess it’s just a macho thing.

In any case, I’m not going to let you emasculate the truth by labeling it as merely a display of “fear.” For my part, it’s not fear you’re detecting, it’s more like disgust. The effect of mass media on forming a society’s ideas about acceptable gender roles is overwhelming and undeniable–a plethora of research indicates as much.

For an excellent expose on just how deep this effect can be, I’d recommend reading Dr. Aric Sigman’s book, “Remotely Controlled.” Seriously, his book is a revelation. And it won’t bore you either–it reads like a good novel! Be well!

1. Could it be that in developed countries the physical labor are less prevalent than in other countries. In some developing countries husband, children and fathers take the pain to go out in sun/rain to do more physical labor leaving their loved ones at home. So, is consumption of fuel energy (gas,coal etc) directly proportional to freedom for woman?

2. We heard about Endocrines at “On Point” . Do you think it is affecting the behaviour of males in countries where fertilizers and chemicals are used in massive amount? The physical affects of endocrine is already apparent in newborn child’s genitels and vise versa for women in countries using a lot of chemicals.

Frankly, unless you work in the porn industry in front of the camera and with your clothes off, when you go to work you use your brain and not your genitals. So what is with all this sexualization of work? Is it so popular because it is titillating? You get to think about men and women – ooh, ooh, ooh! At all the jobs I have ever had I have used my brain and never pulled down my pants.

Women, if someone hires you because they say you have a “feminine” brain and will bring soft, flowery, puffy elements to the workplace, do not celebrate. It is not a move forward. The same sexist structure remains. If they hire you for your rationality and knowledge, then celebrate. You have won liberation when the sexist structure is removed. Not when you are not hired because you’re a woman nor when you are hired because you are a woman.

To clarify, the way power is wielded and distributed throughout society IS largely determined by gender, and this is something we need MORE discussions of, not less.

But I don’t know why we assume that in order for one person to become empowered, it is necessarily robbing someone else.

Kudos to Matt K–ingenuity and cooperation will mark the continuation of our species. Power comes from the ability to sway people by truth rather than force.

And I agree with E.P., too. Whenever people say women want, women think, women are: I never agree with the conclusion. The genders are hardly static, diametrically opposed entities. If we’re brainwashed in anything, it is to believe this against all evidence the contrary.

Much better to separate the world between:
Rational and Irrational

And the economy between:
Upper economic class
Middle economic class
Lower economic class

We need a more rational world and more controls placed on the greed of the upper class.

“I think there maybe some confusion between “machismo” and arrogance, a trait of both men and women. The recession brings Americans down a notch. It has increased feelings of insecurity, fear. The future has become more unclear. I think this affects both men and women. Women can be arrogant too you know!!”

Posted by Joanna Drzewieniecki”

To call “arrogance,” (a human trait) “macho” (a male, sex-specific trait) is quite a sexist premise. And a real abuse of language.

99% of the time male-female differences are discussed or things are described as “masculine” or “feminine” it is bunkum.

Have you people never worked with women in the workplace? Were your eyes wide shut?

I was hoping there would be a followup to FCP but nothing to date.

Levy makes the case that the second generation since the American feminist movement has taken all the wrong cues for what it means to have “equality” and “power”.

FCP was featured in the Canadian magazine MacLeans on the cover.

If there is a death of macho brewing, I welcome it whole heartedly.

The world has too many “tough guys”. We need to as a society get away from the prevalence of tough machismo to a society that instead values merit, knowledge and intelligence. Our future depends on it. The jobs that are of value do not involve lifting and putting things into place. They involve research, design, engineering etc.

Even on a broader level, outside of just occupational considerations, tough guys and macho mentality really are the root of all problems in society. Who starts a fight, and beats someone up, stabs them or shoots them because they looked at their girlfriend wrong outside a bar? A tough guy. Who thinks it is OK to rob someone at knife point? A tough guy. What are the Taliban and Al Queda if not extremist religious tough guys?

Even in the workplace the tough guy tries to push people around, take credit for all the work, and get things done his way, instead of working in teams and letting the best solution win.

On the road, tough guys drive awful large trucks that kill and main people if they have an accident, not to mention the stupid waste of fuel. Tough guys love their guns that get people killed.

If we can completely root out tough guys out of all levels of our society, we might just live in an ideal society where people live in harmony, with very little crime, violence and conflict.

How can we accomplish this? Maybe by raising kids in a way that doesn’t reward being bully’s and doesn’t emphasize adversarial conflict. Ban football and all other contact sports. REALLY punish the bully’s on the school yard, and go out of your way to reward those who achieve intelligent thought, good grades and demonstrate intellectual non-aggressive achievement.

Maybe if we do this we can root out this macho scourge that harms our society on all levels.

Death to macho. Death to tough guys. Long live thought and reasoning.

Must one be “on top”?

Louie suggests women entering leadership positions leaves men “punished” and “stripped.”

Todd seems to imply women only want to self-actualize in ways other than motherhood due to media “brainwashing.”

Dave speaks of Obama as an effeminate–and by definition?– negative force rendering men into (brace yourself for the stereotype): clucking hens.

Why such aggression in the language of gender? What, exactly, are we so afraid of?

I was in South Africa several years ago. They have a terrible crime problem. Hearing the story of Shaka Zulu I realized the problem. What do you do with warriors in a warrior society when there are no more wars? Make trinkets for tourists? We see it in the Native American tribes where it comes out in alcoholism. I have made the transition. In our house, there is not male or female work, just work. We need a male revolution in understanding how to find honorable work.

PRN