Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    A persons considered blind by the person whos opinion they didn't
    adopt. 

      
    not that it matters ---
    asked a friend (shall remain nameless) something along these lines
    and.....
         "they're all f*cked."
    me - "How can you say that?"
         "Geesh, just listen to then talking, or worse, talk to them
          for awhile.  they're f*cked."
    
    can't say i condone this....wholeheartedly anyway :-)
    just thought it was a sad kinda funny.
    
    Bob

    
    "Valuing Differences". Seems the title means that there is value
    in being different, which is true. Sounds as if the participants
    do not value differences, but would rather have everyone reduced
    to one common denominator.
    
    Jim

    The phrasing of the base note makes a gross generalization about
    a gross generalization.  My personal opinion is that neither
    generalization is true (Men, as a whole, are not blind to the
    issues and women, as a whole, don't accuse men (as a whole) of
    being blind.
    
    Perhaps women have a higher probability of being more sensitive
    to these issues because they are more likely to have been victims
    of discrimination themselves.  But discussion of blanket statements
    such as in .0 seem meaningless to me.
    
    				Steve

    It depends upon what are the circumstances which compelled a person
    to make such a statement.  If you found your spouse cheating on
    you last night you might very easily come to that conclusion.  A
    month later you meet someone who you fall head over heals for, chances
    are your outlook has done a 180 degree turnaround.  I'd say that
    a large percentage of people have been a victim of some kind of
    wrongdoing in their lifetime, and I think this is the reason these
    types of statements are made.
    
    RE: An old saying about women:  You can't live with them and you
    can't kill them. :')  (Sorry about that)
                                                    Mike

    
    
        You can air your opinion, as long as its the same as ours!
    
    
    

    Since we are speaking in gross generalities, I would say that men
    aren't any more blind to women's issues than women are towards men's
    issues.
    
    Mike

       re .8   List a few Men's issues that women are talking about.
    
    
                                                   Russ

>re; List a few Men's issues that women are talking about.

1. jock itch
2. women taking up jobs that used to be men-only (and how, now, there
   are fewer options open to men)
	a. the breakdown of household chores
	b. child care
	c. the changing role of the male
		1.  macho-vs-sensitive
		2.  caretaker-vs-being nurtured
3. sports
4. men in love
	a. is it really harder for the man to let go of the relationship?
	b. do men fall faster than women?
	c. is it (still) less-likely that a man will tell you the relationship
	   is over; will he communicate this fact non-verbally by
		1.  starting to see another woman in hopes you'll find out
		2.  being cold until you can't take it any more and break
		    up yourself
		3.  just stop calling
		4.  say he's busy with friends when you want to see him
5. money
6. power
7. money and power

    re: -.8
    
    I didn't say anything about women talking about men's issues, what I
    said was that in general, women are just as blind to things that
    concern men as men are blind to things that concern women.  What that
    means is a few men understand women's issues very well, most understand
    them partially (in varying degrees), and a few men don't understand
    them at all.  The same could be said for women and their ability to
    understand issues that concern men.
    
    For a partial list, see -.10 
    
    Mike

    	A few years ago I worked with a guy who had to be the most narrow
    minded person I ever met. His favorite saying:
    
    "Women: If it wasn't for sex, they'd have a bounty on 'em"
    
    He truly meant it.
    
    Ken

    Because of sexual excitement with some men, women will tolerate
    a lot of male nonsense ...  Take away the prospect of sex and
    women might very well ask ...

      ? who needs 'em ???  and might we be happier without 'em ???

I don't really feel this way, although I know women who do.  Usually is a 
really good defensive wall to protect the self from further pain after 
encountering a bad relationship.  After a while, we get convinced that we're 
better off.  good excuse to maintain the same opposite-sex-as-low-life 
viewpoint rather than take the work required to form a better relationship.

    re -.1
    
    Well said. 
    
    The attitude alluded to earlier strikes me as a cop out.
    
    Its easier to wallow than to look at oneself 
    critically, work on the attitude problems, and
    put the old tapes away...
    
    Women and Men need to support one another, not 
    take potshots and maintain hostile attitudes in
    order to get some payoff that, in the end, is 
    really worth nothing at all. Life is really too
    short and hard enough without adding to it this 
    sort of garbage.

    re: .5
    
    "But discussion of blanket statements such as in .0 seem meaningless 
    to me."
    
    Agreed, Steve, the base note was phrased as a generalization and
    that discussions of same are, arguably, of dubious value.  But
    I'd hazard a guess that Bob's intent was not to (over) generalize
    Would I be doing violence to your original thought, Bob, to say
    that the intent was more on the lines of "Are some of us blind. . .?"
    It strikes me that there could be some value in kicking around
    what it means to be "blind" (culturally, ethically, whatever).
    
    I s'pose one reason for my thinking this way is that for the first
    half of my life, I was pretty well blind to a number of different
    things/people - blind in the sense that although I knew intellectually
    of their existance, I knew very little about how it felt to be black,
    brown, female, handicapped, Jewish, etc, etc. and growing up in
    America.  Because of my blindness I carried around a lot of false
    notions about other people and the way "things should be" (like,
    f'rinstance, ". . .why do [they] act that way?  Why don't [they]
    just. . .like me?")
    
    It took living in some places neither I nor my parents had planned
    to make me aware of just how thoroughly blind I'd been.  Lest anyone
    think by that last phrase that I'm claiming to no longer be blind,
    such is most assuredly not the case; I'm simply a bit more aware
    of some of my blind spots and suspicious that there may be more
    than I'm seeing today.
    
    Steve (II, well III actually, but that sounds *so* pompous. . .)
    

    
    re -.1
    
    Well you certainly cannot savage me any more than Steve
    did...-;
    
    The thoughts are certainly vulnerable to criticism.. I
    don't claim any special insight into the topic, since
    I haven't spent a great deal of time worrying about the
    issues of men's insensitivity. My impression of Steves
    comments is that he took pains to place himself firmly
    on what he considers the "safe" moral high ground. I 
    acknowlege his criticisms, but wonder why he felt obliged
    to dismiss my inquiry so abruptly. Anyway, I'm not terribly
    concerned if someone wants to hang a label... that is their
    problem.
    
    But, if the questions I asked are of dubious value, I think
    the topic itself is a valid one for discussion. Value judgements
    on my original comments are no substitute for added value in the
    replies. My mind is open to whatever wisdom happens along. 
    
    Can we not get beyong the percieved "generalities" and explore the
    issue we all know exists, rather than get hung up on the exact 
    wording?
    
    
    

    re: .17
    
    � Can we not get beyong the percieved "generalities" and explore the
    � issue we all know exists, rather than get hung up on the exact 
    � wording?
    
    As my mom used to say, we *can*, however whether or not we *will*
    is an entirely different question.  It seems to me that part of
    the problem is that, as a large group, it's likely we'll disagree
    on what the (almost any) issue is (often expressed as "Well, I think
    the *real* issue is. . .) and whether of not said same exists.
    
    I think I could present some fairly compelling evidence to back
    the claim that successful communication is perhaps the single most
    common business (perhaps life) problem.  So, good, bad, or indifferent,
    I suspect that the communication breakdown you refer to, Bob, will
    be around for yet a while.
    
    Lest I become (even more) pedantic about communications, I'll stop
    for now by saying that I think that folks looking for (and at)
    their various blind spots ("scotomas" for you Lou Tice fans) makes
    a spiffy topic.
    
    Steve
    

    RE .14 & .15
    
      Very valid points. The only problem is that so many of 
      them are so wrapped up in that anger and wallowing that 
      they don't and won't listen to the concept of yes it was
      a bad experience, but you can go on.
    
      Getting an angry, hurt person to pay head to the words 
      of rational logic is an almost impossible feat. To them
      the voice of reason echoes hollow words.
    
                                          Bob B