A recent post by Cheryl Miller about women not being taken seriously prompted this post. One of her points was comments about Megan McArdle devolve into a discussion about her looks, and that this supports the argument that women are not taken as seriously as men. I can't disagree with the crux of Cheryl's argument, but I do on this one point.
I contend that whether a woman's ideas are taken seriously and whether she is hot or not are two separate questions. A discussion about a woman's looks does not mean her ideas are not taken seriously.
An explanation of the male mind is in order. It is not as one-track as you think.
Women, anytime you meet a man, who is not a close relative or gay, they make a subconscious decision regarding whether or not they want to have sex with you. This answer is then relayed to the conscious mind. If the answer is no, then our minds move onto other things. If the answer is yes, then the conscious mind starts to decide a few questions. First, should I have sex with her? This usually involves an examination of the situation regarding the relationship status of both ourselves and the woman in question. Second, how can I accomplish it? This involves strategy formation beyond the scope of this post.
So, if our subconscious mind has decided that we want to have sex with a woman and our conscious mind decides that this would be okay given the relationship status, then we have two things to juggle, her ideas and whether and how we can sleep with her. This does not mean that her ideas are not taken seriously. It just means we are multitasking.
I am sure some women, or many for that matter, will object to the idea that all men they meet make a decision about whether they want to have sex with them, but this is like objecting to the Sun rising in the East or breathing. It just is. Nevertheless, one can make arguments about how their actions towards women ought to be, but saying men shouldn't think that way is completely futile.
A point that I think is often overlooked is that women have a far more stringent criteria for female beauty. For men it is mostly binary. Would I have sex with her or not? Certainly, there is the question of whether a man would prefer to have sex with one particular woman over another, but that is still a binary decision with a more specific criteria.
Women, on the other hand, have designed a spectrum of beauty that is almost indecipherable to men. Beauty magazines, criticism of shoes, criticism of weight, etc are far more nuanced in the female mind than the male mind. Why this is I do not know, but I will tell you that the societal pressure for perfect beauty comes from other females, not males. Men have a very simple criteria. Do I want to have sex with her or not? This question is completely separate from taking her ideas seriously.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
Well, now I know I don't want to meet you in person.
It's possible that you can discuss someone's looks independently of the value of their ideas, but I think that Megan's commenters aren't making that distinction. It's not as though Megan posts pictures of herself and asks, "Does my butt look big in this?" and the commenters say yes. It's more like she posts about health care, and the commenters respond that her butt looks big.
Well, you might want to think of never, ever meeting another man ever again. Ask any guy you know if my post isn't 99% true.
I agree with you on the point about Megan. I think stupid people attack women on that basis because there is a high probability that it will hurt. It is mean spirited ad hominem attack that makes the person who says it look stupid.
Weren't you just arguing that people should not extrapolate universal truths from personal experience? I asked a guy about this, and he did not identify with this account.
First, this universal extrapolation is from many conversations with other men.
Second, a few points about the guy. 1) He could be lying to you because it would be uncomfortable for him if you to knew he thought about having sex with you. 2) He is a gigantic exception.
Did he have a more thorough explanation than I do not identify with this account?
3) If he is your significant other, then he might lie too.
Context is important for determining the validity of his objection.
Miller is making a joke isn't she? "If I see one more post about how something that happened on the savanna a zillion years ago excuses your inability to control yourself today--despite the many blessings of civilization--I will scream." Screaming, of course, is looked at in civilization--polite, modern society--as a loss of control. It is a holdover from, well, the savanna. Screaming is not a case of an advanced intellect controlling our animal instincts.
Of course, we are all genetically programmed to reproduce. That's how we got here. Relatively few arrive through the miracle of immaculate conception. In most species, the Y chromosome carriers are the aggressors in sex. That is the primary job our gender assigns us. It is inescapable. Because we have an intellect and formed societies, we also took on roles like accountant and place kicker.
The spectacular development of our species is that we can refrain from promiscuous sex long enough to have conversations and share ideas. Some of us do that quite well despite our Y's screaming at us to MAKE BABIES NOW! You can fault us for not always adequately using our intellect to keep our Y's in check, but please don't shun us for having them. Otherwise, it is all girl talk.
I know FLG. I drink beer with FLG. Everyone wants to meet FLG. He is quite capable of keeping his Y's in check and engaging in intellectual conversation.
Post a Comment