muffy%mica.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.berkeley.EDU (Muffy Barkocy) (03/14/91)
The idea of "masculine" and "feminine" characterstics has come up again. People seem to agree that the set of characterstics classified as masculine have always been more highly regarded. My question is, have both men and women felt that way, or was it just men? These days, I hear a lot from women about how masculine characteristics are responsible for all the problems in the world, and feminine characteristics are much better. However, the recent discussion here about women-only colleges doesn't agree with this. It is seen as desirable for people to speak up in class, and it is regarded as an expresion of masculine characteristics (aggressiveness, competitiveness, etc). I believe that speaking up in class is a good thing; if I was interested in/excited by a subject, I enjoyed it more when I talked about it in class. In one case, the subject was rather dull, but my conversations with the teacher were very interesting, and I was excited by understanding the subject, even though I wasn't excited by the subject itself. In the few cases where I felt discouraged from talking in class, I tended to lose interest in the subject. I didn't feel that I was being discouraged for being female, but I must admit that I hadn't heard at the time that women were supposed to be being discouraged, so I wasn't looking for this. Some people have said that what women need is to become more competitive, agressive, etc (i.e. assume masculine characteristics). Others have said that the best thing for women is to form societies of their own, eliminating the "masculine" characteristics altogether. I haven't heard many people say that the best thing would be for people to be allowed to develop their own set of characteristics, regardless of their gender. Putting labels on the characteristics seems to cause people to see the entire set as "good" or "bad," depending on their ideas. The problem is not in the way men or women are socialized, rather, the problem is that they are socialized in distinct ways. If some characteristic is desirable, why isn't it desirable in everyone? Of course, making everyone the same isn't a great idea, either. Well, I never have any solutions, but I do believe that something shouldn't be condemned (or applauded) just because it carries the "masculine" or "feminine" label, and I believe that people should get a chance to develop as people, rather than "boys" or "girls." Speaking of which, does anyone have a good argument in favor of one sex or the other being encouraged in a particular characteristic, while the other is discouraged? Muffy
farmerl@ccncsu.colostate.edu (lisa ann farmer) (03/20/91)
Males respond in class. I think the word I would rather use for this is assertive. When I ask something in class I don't feel like I am being aggressive but that i am asserting myself and clarifying that I do or don't understand. I also feel that my learning is increased by doing this. I would be aggressive if I went up to the board and took the chalk out of the professor's hand. I can't give a 'dictionary' definition of the two terms aggressive and assertive but I hope my examples help. Anyways, just my observation... Lisa From: farmerl@handel.CS.ColoState.Edu (lisa ann farmer) Path: handel.CS.ColoState.Edu!farmerl
dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us (Doug Philips) (03/28/91)
In article <13571@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU>, handel!farmerl@ccncsu.colostate.edu (lisa ann farmer) writes: +Males respond in class. I think the word I would rather use for this +is assertive. When I ask something in class I don't feel like I am +being aggressive but that i am asserting myself and clarifying that I +do or don't understand. I also feel that my learning is increased by +doing this. I would be aggressive if I went up to the board and took +the chalk out of the professor's hand. I can't give a 'dictionary' +definition of the two terms aggressive and assertive but I hope my +examples help. Anyways, just my observation... I agree with your distinction between assertive and aggressive. I don't have "pat" definitions to propose either. The Random House Dictionary on my desk says "assert:... 1) To state positively, but often without support or reason." I defintely don't like the tone of the "without support or reason" clause, so I'm willing to abandon that definition and try to come up with another one. I don't necessarily think it is possible to draw a fine line, but I think it is worth looking into. I am curious how you (plural) would classify the following as either assertive/aggressive/???: Student 1 interrupts and/or talks over Student 2. Teacher interrupts a student, either cutting them off entirely or saying something like "what is your point?" Student 1 speaks after Student 2 without enough of a delay for Student 3 to feel comfortable speaking. Students A, B, C dominate class discussion by talking freely, Students E, F, ... raise their hands, instructor ignores them while letting A, B, and C speak. Teacher prefers to let students A, B, C speak, calling on others, if at all, only when A, B, or C don't "raise their hands." Student interrupts teacher with comment: "Bullpuckey!" Student interrupts teacher with comment: "What? could you clarify that please?" Part of my interest is in the assertive/aggressive division, but I am also interested in the sexual politics of the classroom, and how those two are related. -Doug