VoyForums
[ 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: 12345[6] ]


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

Date Posted: 22:33:33 06/21/01 Thu
Author: gumtree
Subject: Gender "bending"

Read the post below concerning "male" and "female" qualities. Still coagulating on that a bit, but seems to me that there are these qualities to be found in Human Beings in general - and I mean both the positive and negative. Think Ghandi, and then think Mama Borgia. There are good and bad people all over the spectrum - to classify some aspects of human personality as "female" or "male" is inherently sexist. Sorry, ladies.

Amy and I were discussing Glenda Jackson a bit back - and so naturally, Elizabeth I comes up in my mind...definately a female, and characterized in her time as the archetype "Virgin Queen" - but ruled England as her father never could. This was not because she was a woman, a woman acting like a man, or any other permutation - she was Political. No case to be made about "dominant" males in that situation.

In recent history we have Jimmy Carter - a good man, with good intentions, but not "dominant" - and I wouldnt classify him as "femme" either (you don't survive, let alone get promoted, in our fine U.S. Navy being submissive). His problem in ruling was what I call "paralysis through analysis" - and taking on too much all at once.

Another, more complicaed example from history is one of Elizabeth's successors - Charles I. (I can go on and on with this one, so I'll try to make it short)...Charles was brought up to be King. He was a mixed bag, authoritatively, tho - dominant in all the wrong ways (unwilling to compromise, tending to view his own voice as absolute), and submissive in the wrong ways, too (tending to view situations as "fate" rather than something that could be changed). Look where he ended up (not quite in a ditch, covered in petrol, but he lost track of his head...)

ANYways - I really dont think that there are any ways of classifying folk as "female" or "male" personalities - one is brought up in a certain mind/gender set, usually for obvious reasons. Its that annoying human capacity to make decisions that usually messes up the convenient predictable outcome.

Think like you are.

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


Replies:


Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.