Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    Well, which is it -- men and women as groups, or men and women
    individually?  The former sounds like gross sexual stereotyping, the
    latter may be anecdotally true, but no more so than the anecdotal evidence
    for men and women who find no more cause for hostility on the grounds
    of sex than they do on dozens of other grounds.
    
    But, yes, for those who do believe in hostility between the sexes,
    either individually or as groups, I'm sure there are a host of
    psychological and sociological grounds for explaining such hostility.
    
    Kit
    

    You also should remember that the sample you deal with here in Notes
    contains a rather large proportion of disenchanted, divorced men and
    women and other in-betweens who are sexually frustrated for one reason
    or another. Completely absent are the young Tom Sawyers who will clown
    for Beckys and adolescents who trust their hormones blindly.

    RE: .2  Bustamante
    
    > Completely absent are the young Tom Sawyers who will clown
    > for Beckys and adolescents who trust their hormones blindly.
    
    Considering the tremendous number of "network romances" that
    abound via Notes and Email, I'd say there are still plenty
    of romantic men and women on the net who are far from being
    disenchanted (regardless of their political views on any
    given issue.)

See note 676?

I think the spectrum of participants in this and other notes conferences is
broader than you might assume.

Anyway, I think Kris' observations are substantiated in the "outside world".
It's a contradiction which has bothered me for a long time as well.  (From
what I've read in the newspapers, Gloria Steinem's new book is a "textbook
case".)

I think that a small part of it is the power that each sex feels the other
holds over them.  (I'm not sure how this applies to gays, though I don't
think that they participate in this particular dance quite to the degree that
straights do.)

			Steve

    
    When I exhibit hostility, often it is just suppressed anger finally
    being uncorked.  Sometimes I am exploring my anger or what caused it
    for the first time, and if I post without a second thought I may be
    blissfully unaware of the people I have singed.  Until I see their
    response.
    
    I think a great deal of the M/F hostility that goes on in notes, and
    sometimes the posturing we see every day in the media, is the result of
    people overstating or overwhelming or biasing their communications for
    an effect.  To win people over to their side?  To seek people of
    similar mindset?  perhaps.  One thing is for sure - a vast majority of
    the middle-road people on any subject will probably listen less to
    violent outburst than to calm discussion (even if that discussion
    contains passion, anger, anguish, pain, fury, whatever - and yes there
    are calm ways to communicate these feelings).
    
    I think a tremendous amount of the anger that results between one
    gender and another is *misdirected* or has been *redirected*.  It is a
    faultfinding that stopped too soon and pointed at the first target. "my
    ex screwed me over".  "thus-and-such isn't fair to men". "so and so
    discriminates against women".  And what some people may not know is
    that *we have heard it*.  If we were listening, we have heard it.  If
    we were not listening, we may never hear it.  Sometimes I don't listen
    if it's something I don't want to hear.
    
    And everyone is sometimes subject to the feeling that "my pain is
    harsher than your pain".  We are all naturally at the center of our own
    universes.  We are all highly concerned that people listen to us and
    validate our pains and our needs, because that is one thing that can
    help us feel secure that we are okay, and where we should be.  If
    people concur with us about our pain or the burdens we bear, perhaps
    that reduces the pain or the weight of the burden.  And if the pain or
    burden feels or seems like it won't ever leave, that things will never
    change, and that it is something we will absolutely never get over -
    perhaps that is all we seek.  Consensus that we are right in wielding
    our bloody axe or carrying that torch or carving up the person who
    accidentally stepped on a hot-button they perhaps should have been
    aware of.
    
    But pain is part of the human condition.  Shall we nurse our wounds,
    tend to one another, or decry it all and flame one another soundly?
    
    -Jody

Re: .5

Yes!

	Steve

    I don't think the hostility is just gender based but in a
    notesfile like this one it appears to be. I think that we 
    spend too much time knocking others down to make ourselves
    look better, ego tripping I guess.
    
    Besides, with all of the gender bashing, its the rare person
    that is not still looking for Mr/Mrs right.
    
    			-Jim-

    
    Can anyone really believe that such impersonal means
    of communication (electronic notes/mail) can actually
    replace the personal face-to-face interaction ??
    
    Electronic bbs/notes/mail is where people come for very small
    periods of time to let off steam or have fun ... or various other
    reasons. In these small interactions little is revealed, everyone
    is just trying to make a point or "one-up" somebody to get the
    last word. As Jim said in <729.8>, it is "ego tripping".
    
    Just remember, these key strokes that I'am making to create
    words and sentences IS NOT TALKING ... it is typing
    You cannot distinguish my voice, or my facial expressions.
    You do not even know where I'am sitting or what is going on
    around me at this moment .. and the same for me
    
    The hostility in this notesfile and others, is directly 
    porportional to the number of people that participate and
    FORGET that their interaction is impersonal
    
    I close my note by STRONGLY suggesting that the mennotes
    conference have a Social get together REAL SOON
    and I volunteer to host this event at my residence.
    
    christopher

Folks, we have a volunteer!

	Steve

re; .9

>    Can anyone really believe that such impersonal means
>    of communication (electronic notes/mail) can actually
>    replace the personal face-to-face interaction ??
 
    I believe it cannot replace it, but it can connect me with people I
    might not be able to itneract with face to face
       
>    Electronic bbs/notes/mail is where people come for very small
>    periods of time to let off steam or have fun ... or various other
>    reasons. In these small interactions little is revealed, everyone
>    is just trying to make a point or "one-up" somebody to get the
>    last word. As Jim said in <729.8>, it is "ego tripping".
    
    I do not come to electronic mail or notes for very small periods of
    time, or to just let off steam or have fun.  Fully 50% of my social
    connections occur for the most part via the net (thank goodness i have
    a home terminal!).  I communicate, support, share, listen, and banter
    via mail and notes.
    
>    Just remember, these key strokes that I'am making to create
>    words and sentences IS NOT TALKING ... it is typing
>    You cannot distinguish my voice, or my facial expressions.
>    You do not even know where I'am sitting or what is going on
>    around me at this moment .. and the same for me
    
    I don't think the facial expression or what's going on around you is
    that important.  I agree talking is more expressive, but given a grasp
    of whatever language you're communicating with, and a feel for the
    people who are reading what you're writing, you can generally get the
    point across.
    
>    I close my note by STRONGLY suggesting that the mennotes
>    conference have a Social get together REAL SOON
>    and I volunteer to host this event at my residence.
 
    I think that would do wonders.  I look forward to this....
    
    -Jody

    re .0, I think it's basically a love/hate relationship for many
    heterosexuals, both men and women - the old "ya can't live with'em and
    ya can't live without'em" bit.
    
    Also, I sometimes think that part of the problem is that most men may
    have different agendas than most women do.  Most straight men and women
    do enjoy each other's company and enjoy being in romantic
    relationships, yet if most men could have the world be exactly the way
    they want it, and have women act and be exactly the way they want them
    to be, would that world also be an ideal world in the eyes of most
    women?  I think we basically like each other but we sometimes want
    different things and it causes problems.
    
    Lorna
    

Re: .12

Lorna,

See HYDRA::DAVE_BARRY 716.6 (second part) for the differences between what
men and women want.

Ben

re .11

>    I don't think the facial expression or what's going on around you is
>    that important.  I agree talking is more expressive, but given a grasp

Bzzzt!  Wrong!  Thank you for playing.

Go and do a body language course.  In face-to-face interactions it can amount 
for up to 70% of the communication, with dialogue contributing only about 30%.

PS: Good sales people know this and use it.

    
    It's even worse than that, David...
    
    	Words:  less than 10% of human communication (like, about 7%!)
        Tone of voice:  30-something percent
        Body language:  Over 50%
    
    ...at least it was when I used to do training on this stuff.