Following an offhand remark on Twitter, I got a (very pleasant) earful from a guy with a PhD in Neuroscience who questioned whether sexual differences in scholastic choices was nature or nurture. That is, why are the STEM subjects dominated by men? The always unstated version that disrupts the progressive narrative of patriarchal oppression is: Why are they dominated by men when women are getting most of the degrees?
I dunno, man. I'm a father of boys and girls, I've coached boys and girls, I've worked with boys and girls and it sure looks to me from years and years of this stuff like there's some kind of underlying difference. It's also hard to believe that 100,000,000 years (or whatever the number is) of evolution wouldn't result in brain specialization like it has with physical specialization.
Aside: Can we please stop with the action movies where women are beating up men? It just doesn't happen. I'm sorry, but when I see it, the movie is pretty much ruined for me.
Anyway, I don't have any studies to back me up because I'd rather watch the morning EPL games and cook bacon. Besides, why do I need studies if I've got a wealth of experiences that jives with every other coach and parent I've ever met?
 |
| I blame the Patriarchy. |
6 comments:
"Can we please stop with the action movies where women are beating up men? It just doesn't happen. I'm sorry, but when I see it, the movie is pretty much ruined for me."
So let me get this straight: we have an entire class of movies where the hero ultimately wins out in spite of being some combination of outnumbered, outgunned, physically outmached, undertrained, ill-informed, beaten so severely that any real person would have been killed several times over, and generally winging it against a well-organized and well-equipped opponent who may have had years to plan and prepare. . .
And the point where you draw the line in this rampant fantasyland is when the hero or their sidekick is a girl who can win a fight?
I'm with KT on this one.
It's my wife's pet peeve, too. As she puts it (I'm paraphrasing):
A trained woman can beat up an untrained man, because she's trained. A trained woman cannot beat a trained man because he's got 100 pounds and 6 inches of reach on her and knows how to use it to his advantage.
*with exceptions for blindsiding, suckerpunching, and blunt instruments to the head.
Aside: Can we please stop with the action movies where women are beating up men? It just doesn't happen. I'm sorry, but when I see it, the movie is pretty much ruined for me.
We've had some chats with our girls about this.
To the point of, on the umpteenth viewing of Frozen, I pointed out that Anna's tactical choices during the second to last scene of the movie, were what made it work-- usually, that woulda been a really dumb move. (Obscure because, hey, you never know who hasn't seen a movie yet and I didn't HAVE to spoiler it.)
Disney cartoons are not too bad about this. Even the scene in Tangled where she overpowers the guy, it's with sense. And a frying pan. And she's still being kinda dumb. (It was in the trailers!)
Wow, Harvey from IMAO came over to comment? I'm honored!
Tim, I object to women beating up men because of what it does to the culture. Heroes overcoming hopeless odds is one thing, but what I see is this continual push to show how girls can do everything boys can do only better and how women don't need men to protect them. Go spend some time with abused women and let me know what you find out. I'll bet you'll wish we embraced chivalry and that embrace requires both sexes to participate. If only men do it, they'll quickly give up because they're not being valued as protectors.
Which is what we have now.
"Even when it looks hopeless, keep trying, you can do it" vs "girls are physically identical, if not superior, to boys."
One's good, one's an embodiment of hope, the other is lying to guys on a basic level that will result in them doing serious harm to women. Yeah, a lot of guys aren't that dumb-- but it's hard to totally overcome something you always see going in a specific way.
Likewise, especially if they never rough-housed any, a lot of women simply don't grasp the idea that guys are stronger.
They'll mistake physical tricks for raw strength, which ain't happening; I've had folks try to tell me that I'm as strong as men because I can pick up tires that the men can't-- that's because I know the trick to using balance instead of strength, while they're picking it up with plain old strength. Put us to lifting raw weight and it's quickly obvious that they are a whole lot stronger, duh.
I can understand movies focusing on the physical, that's easy to display. The ways guys are superior WORK nicely on film, although I'm quite fond of the "while the bad guys are beating up the good guy, the good gal uses her brains to stop them" setup, be it by her shooting the bad guy when her guy has just taken out all but one and he's in the middle of a Big Evil talk, or "hey, they're all busy fighting over the Plot Device, I'll just go snag it."
"I can understand movies focusing on the physical, that's easy to display. The ways guys are superior WORK nicely on film, although I'm quite fond of the "while the bad guys are beating up the good guy, the good gal uses her brains to stop them" setup, be it by her shooting the bad guy when her guy has just taken out all but one and he's in the middle of a Big Evil talk, or "hey, they're all busy fighting over the Plot Device, I'll just go snag it.""
BINGO! Teamwork. It's the essence of Saint John Paul II's Theology of the Body. We are complimentary, not equal. I know for a fact many of the subjects where women are vastly superior to men. See also: multitasking.
Post a Comment