Okay- if I misinterpreted anyone's intent, I apologize -- Boston Public Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, [10] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 13:34:32 05/10/02 Fri
Author: Hobsonphile
Subject: Okay- if I misinterpreted anyone's intent, I apologize
In reply to: Su 's message, "Lets all relax, eh" on 12:46:53 05/10/02 Fri

Because of my own personal experiences, I admit I am hypersensitive to people posting messages that essentially declare someone unattractive without backing up their claims beyond mere lookism. Wakener, at least you tried to present an argument, and because of that, you have my respect- lauren, however, did not, and that lies at the root of my reaction.

And just FYI, I'm not a feminist in the commonly understood sense of the word. Oprah's therapeutic ethos grates on my nerves. In actuality, I thought putting Scott in therapy without some extreme extenuating circumstances was a terrible idea that did damage to the character.

But then again, I don't think Scott is a post-feminist male. When I think of manliness, I think producer, provider, and protecter. I think of a single minded focus on work that is responsible for the great infrastructure that exists in this world and some of our most powerful ideas. Not to say that women cannot be producers, providers, or protecters, but I've always felt that men, because they were men, were MORALLY OBLIGATED to fill this role. This is not a feminist view- it is very traditionalist, actually. I see nothing in Scott that suggests he is unable to fulfill the male role as I, and Western Society for much of its history, view it. Scott is certainly more sensitive than average, but remember that throughout history, there have been MEN creating works of great emotion in art, literature, and music. MEN throughout history have written passionate love letters to their wives while they are away in government or war. I recommend reading the letters of John and Abigail Adams- John was equally as effusive as his wife. Actually, the diary he kept in early adulthood also reveals a great deal of self-doubt and introspection. And yet most of his contemporaries- the ones who didn't have an axe to grind- never suggested that he was "weak" because of his sensitivity or his passion. In fact, most who knew him well recognized his strength of mind and found him very likable.

Strength does not involve never having doubts about yourself, or never having sensitive corners of your nature. What's important is WHETHER you stand up when it is truly important, not what you may be feeling as you do so.

JMO,
Steph

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: Okay- if I misinterpreted anyone's intent, I apologize -- lauren~lizz, 09:23:16 05/16/02 Thu