Re: Gender Bias For Memes/ Memes and Sexuality

From: Kenneth Van Oost (Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be)
Date: Sat Jul 22 2000 - 21:05:41 BST

  • Next message: Chris Lofting: "RE: Was Freud a Minivan or S.U.V. Kind of Guy? Israel and Palestine."

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA03401 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 22 Jul 2000 20:38:45 +0100
    Message-ID: <000901bff418$53b49800$2f06bed4@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    References: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIEEIACHAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
    Subject: Re: Gender Bias For Memes/ Memes and Sexuality
    Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 22:05:41 +0200
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Hi Chris, you wrote,

    > yes, these distinctions are covered at the websites but in a context of
    left
    > brain/right brain and so you need to be wary. For example you use the
    > action/language distinction. I understand what you mean but I think you
    may
    > need to expand on it. There is the 'man of few words' cliche that goes
    along
    > with this...as well as the concept of a 'chatter-box' often used
    describing
    > females...

    The distinction action/ language is used in more general terms. As for the
    con-
    cept of a ' chatter-box ', I think the term is more cultural related than
    it have
    a real memetic bias, it is more a prejudice expressed by males.
    We ' chatter ' on this list for ages about ' useless things ' like my wife
    calls
    my memes...!!

    > Not sure about consensus as male and opportunism as female. Consensus
    means
    > an agreement and that is more female in that it is a term found in the
    space
    > in-between objects; relational space - more female. Aha -- yes of course,
    > the PROCESS of consensus making is female but once established so it
    becomes
    > an object and so male. Thus the term consensus has a development process
    > that follows the bind-bound-bond-blend where the initial phase is
    different
    > parties 'circling' each other, spiraling through spacetime. They contract
    > and move from a relational emphasis to becoming/establishing a whole in
    the
    > form of an agreed-upon term/phrase/ruling etc.
    >
    > You have male linked to opportunism .. umm..yea..ok... if left to their
    own
    > devices the idea is not to get consensus as to get consensus to THEIR
    point
    > of view!

    > Thus any perceived weakness in the other party is jumped-upon;
    > there is still present the drive to be number one.

    << Maybe a left over from our hunting past, a good hunter knows the weak
    spots of its pray. As in politics...I think you can 't 'win ' an argument
    on your
    opponent strong points, you can only ' win ' by showing his points are
    weaker than yours. But that naturally means not that your points are ' stro
    nger '.
    In a debate points of argument are just tools/ metaphors if you like, you
    can 't
    win a debate ' on points ' , you win a debate if you can push ' your
    points '
    through...and that is Male !! The hunter pushes the speer through the heart
    of the deer...a hunting party can't be won ' on points ' not by both
    parties.
    That is too abstract...

    > The female emphasis is more on transformation, birth, where neither party
    >'wins' in that they all 'win'.
    >
    > And 'general' as male? umm...maybe I am misinterpreting this but since the
    > emphasis in males is more overall on objects emphasis so there is a
    > favouring the particular and the local so:

    << Maybe I am in the wrong here, general is not the same as in Sameness,as
    in the bias for Males !? >>

    > MALE --- FEMALE
    >
    > Local --- NON-local
    > Particular --- General
    >
    > We CAN mix these distinctions due to the use of the method of recursive
    > dichotomisations (and you do mention this), but in general (!) we do see
    > these gender differences. (but see later comments re education etc.)

    << My point is here at the very beginning of the genetic/ memetic bias, that
    is at the point of dividing into Male/ Female the bias for the discriptions
    are
    laid down, as in single context for general...it is all in the words we
    use...
    there is no difference, just the use of words is different, don 't forget,
    what
    I post here, is translated into English from my writings in Dutch...>>

    > Perhaps in general/special you mean casual vs dressed-up? As in males wear
    > the same jeans, sneakers, underwear (black suits) for months and the
    females
    > dress differently everyday? :-)

    << All of this is subject to change, though !! In Belgium there is a
    dicussion
    going on about what kind of forbidden substances are in the drinking-water,
    like oestrogen-residus which unbanlance our hormones.
    IMHO man are becoming more ' femanised ' due to those residus, so in a
    way more to Difference, in respect you need to be wary...Males are not
    ' really ' males anymore, some are, but that is another story...>>

    > I find the suicide perspective is interesting in that the male blows their
    > brains apart (very explicit, in your face) and the female takes a tablet
    and
    > 'dissapears' (very implicit, quiet).

    << here can the same notion be applied as above, you need to be wary,
    again in Belgium, the suicide-attempt, a Female bias is on the rise in the
    Male
    population...due to the fact IMHO of those mentioned residus...>>

    ( Snipped a lot )

    > The male IS more single context and so more biased to 'react' without
    > thought of consequence; the male is more 'totalist', fundamentalist
    whereas
    > the female is more relativist, more context aware (and so more
    discerning).
    >
    > The goal of education is to 'refine' our gene-derived skills and our
    present
    > system allows for the de-gendering of some of these seemingly
    > gender-specific skills.

    << Same argument here Chris, gender- specific skills are ' fading ', the
    in-
    tanglement of both sexes becomes a ' fuzzy ' process_ Males are femani-
    sed, too mush oestrogen gives cancer on the one hand, ' fat ' on the other
    hand_that is according Bill Spight maby the key of the increased puberty
    onset
    among girls...have we closed the circle...!? (See posts on Monday 17/ 07)

    > Overall I have no problems with the list. you seem to have gotten the idea
    > re left/right, sameness/difference etc.

    Thanks Chris for the compliment, it gave me great pleasure reading that, but
    ideas like left/ right; dark/ light, male/ female ;...have always intrigued
    me...

    Many regards,

    Kenneth

    (I am, because we are) happy

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 22 2000 - 20:39:34 BST