tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861197.post8707404111303250299..comments2023-06-27T16:51:05.805+02:00Comments on The Pangrammaticon: Desire and IntentionThomashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04858865501469168339noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861197.post-50102022764696684642016-02-18T08:11:19.985+01:002016-02-18T08:11:19.985+01:00Thanks Wicked and Grant,
I'll just put in my ...Thanks Wicked and Grant,<br /><br />I'll just put in my two cents.<br /><br />1) It seems to me that everyone acknowledges sex differences of some kind. I discussed this in <a href="http://pangrammaticon.blogspot.dk/2015/12/meg-urry-on-science-and-gender.html" rel="nofollow">my post</a> on Meg Urry's suggestions for how to make things more equal. Wicked's evolutionary theory may not be everyone's cup of tea (and may be scientifically controversial) but I'm also willing to allow folk theories and even personal experiences into the conversation. I don't think "science" should be given the last word on Freud's famous question, "What do women want?" I think women themselves should have a lot to say. But I don't think we should just take their word for it either. That's just experience talking.<br /><br />2) Wicked's imagined example of female rivalry reminded me of paragraph from WCWilliams's <i>Improvisations</i>: "There are divergences of humor that cannot be reconciled. A young woman of much natural grace of manner and very apt at a certain color of lie is desirous of winning the good graces of one only slightly her elder but nothing comes of her exertions. Instead of yielding to a superficial advantage she finally gives up the task and continues in her own delicate bias of peculiar and beautiful design much to the secret delight of the onlooker who is thus regaled by the spectacle of two exquisite and divergent natures playing one against the other." (XXV, 2) I've mentioned it before in <a href="http://pangrammaticon.blogspot.dk/2015/11/a-delicate-bias.html" rel="nofollow">another context</a>. Here, again, I think "garden variety speculation" (sometimes informed by the finest poetry) should be a legitimate part of the conversation. We're trying to understand each other as human beings. We have to compare our experiences, not just look to what "studies show".Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04858865501469168339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861197.post-12229509529075075742016-02-17T20:30:33.078+01:002016-02-17T20:30:33.078+01:00I'm just posting to point out a couple of absu...I'm just posting to point out a couple of absurdities in the previous comment.<br /><br />1) The status-seeking hypothesis, to put it kindly, does not hold up to basic scrutiny. No large scale study of human couple demonstrates it when other factors are considered, and the better defined "status" is, the less it holds. Here's one such examination of data from 1,507 couples.<br /><br />http://asr.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/05/29/0003122414536391<br /><br />2) There's not much to rebuke here, since it's garden variety speculation on differences between sexes. There exist very few ways to functionalize "hiding intentions from themselves," but when considering how males and females hide intentions or information from each other, the only real evidence appears to be self-reported, and we already know how the commenter feels about that. What the commenter should have paid attention to is the collective evidence that men are more prone than women to read sexuality into situations where sex is a tertiary possibility or focus, evidence which is as good or better than anything the commenter can offer for the suggestion women are more masterful deceivers.<br /><br />http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2744967/Grantnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861197.post-37274636993410363432016-02-17T17:09:11.314+01:002016-02-17T17:09:11.314+01:00I think it is important to acknowledge two additio...I think it is important to acknowledge two additional things: <br /><br />1) Women, on average, are more attracted to status. Men, on average, are more attracted to fecundity (which translates as roughly youth + fertility). These preferences have deep evolutionary roots that I won't explore here, but I have a feeling that some of the drum banging about sexism in science is an outgrowth of the "blank slatism" that has infested academia. If men and women are the same, the thinking goes, shouldn't they be equal in everything? Any inequality is viewed as sexism, rather than the natural consequence of sex differences. <br /><br />Anyways, taking these preferences into account, and also that both sexes find intelligence attractive, a mentor/mentee relationship between a high-status male scientist and a young, attractive female student must be wrought with sexual tension. Throw alcohol on the fire and someone is going to snap. <br /><br />2) Women, on average, are much better at hiding their intentions, even from themselves. Again, there are deep evolutionary reasons for this, but it boils down to women needing to hide their intentions from rivals to avoid reprisals for stealing a mate or resources. This means that an attractive female grad student may be doing things to win the attention of the high-status male scientist, but be totally unaware what she is doing. If you asked her, she would probably say "Oh gross. That guy is way too old for me." But perhaps she starts wearing tighter jeans to work, a lower cut blouse, a brighter shade of red lipstick and feeds off of the positive attention from her colleague. This doesn't, however, do anything to help her be taken seriously as a colleague in the workplace. And these are powerful signals of interest. It is ultimately the man, however, that usually has to make the first move and make his intentions known. If it is awkward and she is not receptive, she can always claim that she was "harassed", which might be preferable to making her intentions known and might find disapproval from her peers. <br /><br />I could go on and on about the battle of the sexes, but I think it's important to acknowledge that men and women are different and that it usually takes two to tango. Any policy to stem the tide of "sexual harassment" should take these factors into account instead of casting men as rapey villians and women as hapless victims. <br /><br />Wicked Sepianoreply@blogger.com