4 ms·

There is a line from a post apocalyptic TV show: "Ain’t nothing sadder than an outdoor cat that thinks he’s an indoor cat". Why is it considered "misbehaving" w

by halfcat 12y ago

There is a line from a post apocalyptic TV show: "Ain’t nothing sadder than an outdoor cat that thinks he’s an indoor cat". Why is it considered "misbehaving" when men don't act like women? We have advanced to a rather cushy society that allows for this stance to seem reasonable, and when considered only in this setting, perhaps it is. But the world is not all roses. Sometimes violence is not only an acceptable way of dealing with a situation, sometimes it is the only way of dealing with it and achieving a successful outcome. The bully comes in many forms, and when it's you, or your family, or your society that peaks the bully's prolonged interest, you only have one question: Fight, or flight? This decision boils down to whether or not you stand any chance against the bully. If your child is being stalked by a street gang, you should probably get in the car, drive 30 hours and relocate. If your child gets beat up by the school bully every week, then by all means, get him training on how to throw a punch, and the next time the bully chooses to bully, your child should break his nose. This sounds harsh, I'm sure, but my opinion comes from the experience of being in such situations (mostly as an adult, with non-violent bullies). The bully and I were lucky, as the bully got bored and moved on. But that experience made it crystal clear that one of the most horrible crimes anyone can commit is abusing one's power over another who is not capable of defending themself. We all agree rape is among the worst crimes a human can commit. It's an extreme case of abuse of power. Bullying, in whatever form, is abuse of power. I am in full agreement with Sun Tzu that it's better to avoid a battle if possible, because there is always a cost. But once you determine a battle is unavoidable, the right thing to do becomes clear, and in some cases the right thing includes violence. Luckily, most of us live in good enough circumstances that resorting to violence is rarely the right choice, but it's foolish to think violence is never an acceptable way of dealing with problems. Anyone who thinks that should count themselves lucky that their life experience so far has not brought them face to face with a real bully who won't go away.

rquantz 12y ago
Why is it considered "misbehaving" when men don't act like women? What does it mean to act like a woman? You think you know. Name a behavior, I guarantee I can name a woman who does not engage in said behavior. But the world is not all roses. Sometimes violence is not only an acceptable way of dealing with a situation, sometimes it is the only way of dealing with it and achieving a successful outcome. But the GP was not talking about the entire world, they were specifically talking about child bullies. The bully and I were lucky, as the bully got bored and moved on. And yet the lesson you draw from this experience is that children should be taught to respond violently to a bully?
- halfcat 12y ago
  > What does it mean to act like a woman? You think you know. Name a behavior, I guarantee I can name a woman who does not engage in said behavior. There is no set of "woman behaviors". If you want me to make a wild guess at a sweeping generalization for which there will be endless counter-examples, then here is my answer: Women in general are more risk-averse than men in general. This is the most logical explanation I have encountered for why both the world's leadership and the world's prisons are populated primarily by men. > And yet the lesson you draw from this experience is that children should be taught to respond violently to a bully? Not at all. From my experiences with bullies, the lesson I draw is that children should be taught that there is a time for violence, and they should be taught how to decide when it's time to take violent action against a bully. The mechanics of such an education are certainly non-trivial. If you tell a 5-year-old that "violence is okay", then you have failed. I expect that to properly educate a child in this area would require most of the childhood and into early adulthood. So it's not an easy task. If you want to tell your child that "violence is wrong", as one of those temporary lies that we have to tell our children because they don't yet have the brain capacity or life experience to understand the truth, then that's fine. But it seems like we have a majority of parents who go with the convenient lie and fail to follow up. I think that if the population were properly educated on this topic, the overwhelming majority would never encounter a situation over the course of their entire life where they chose violence.
  - rquantz 12y ago
    Ok, next question. What is a woman? This is a serious question. Here's the thing about your answer to the previous question: if what you mean when you say "act like a woman" is "cautious," why not just say "why is it considered misbehaving when men act recklessly?" The answer to that question would be much more instructive, although also somewhat tautological. You correctly describe your response as a sweep generalization with endless counter examples. In other words, wrong. Gender is a cultural construction. Get that through your skull, and you can start talking about what you're actually talking about rather than muddying things up with your prejudices about men and women. As for teaching about violence, you've made another mistake. Violence is always an evil. If nothing else, a violent act against an evil person still brutalizes the actor. The difference between story book morality and the real world is that real morality often involves choices between multiple evils. If the evil of not acting violently outweighs the evil of acting violently, then you must act violently. But it is not a lie to teach children that violence is always wrong. it seems like we have a majority of parents who go with the convenient lie and fail to follow up Yes, if only parents would stop teaching their children that violence is wrong, there would be less violence in the world. You realize how rediculous that assertion is?

by halfcat 12y ago

rquantz 12y ago

Why is it considered "misbehaving" when men don't act like women? What does it mean to act like a woman? You think you know. Name a behavior, I guarantee I can name a woman who does not engage in said behavior. But the world is not all roses. Sometimes violence is not only an acceptable way of dealing with a situation, sometimes it is the only way of dealing with it and achieving a successful outcome. But the GP was not talking about the entire world, they were specifically talking about child bullies. The bully and I were lucky, as the bully got bored and moved on. And yet the lesson you draw from this experience is that children should be taught to respond violently to a bully?

halfcat 12y ago
> What does it mean to act like a woman? You think you know. Name a behavior, I guarantee I can name a woman who does not engage in said behavior. There is no set of "woman behaviors". If you want me to make a wild guess at a sweeping generalization for which there will be endless counter-examples, then here is my answer: Women in general are more risk-averse than men in general. This is the most logical explanation I have encountered for why both the world's leadership and the world's prisons are populated primarily by men. > And yet the lesson you draw from this experience is that children should be taught to respond violently to a bully? Not at all. From my experiences with bullies, the lesson I draw is that children should be taught that there is a time for violence, and they should be taught how to decide when it's time to take violent action against a bully. The mechanics of such an education are certainly non-trivial. If you tell a 5-year-old that "violence is okay", then you have failed. I expect that to properly educate a child in this area would require most of the childhood and into early adulthood. So it's not an easy task. If you want to tell your child that "violence is wrong", as one of those temporary lies that we have to tell our children because they don't yet have the brain capacity or life experience to understand the truth, then that's fine. But it seems like we have a majority of parents who go with the convenient lie and fail to follow up. I think that if the population were properly educated on this topic, the overwhelming majority would never encounter a situation over the course of their entire life where they chose violence.
- rquantz 12y ago
  Ok, next question. What is a woman? This is a serious question. Here's the thing about your answer to the previous question: if what you mean when you say "act like a woman" is "cautious," why not just say "why is it considered misbehaving when men act recklessly?" The answer to that question would be much more instructive, although also somewhat tautological. You correctly describe your response as a sweep generalization with endless counter examples. In other words, wrong. Gender is a cultural construction. Get that through your skull, and you can start talking about what you're actually talking about rather than muddying things up with your prejudices about men and women. As for teaching about violence, you've made another mistake. Violence is always an evil. If nothing else, a violent act against an evil person still brutalizes the actor. The difference between story book morality and the real world is that real morality often involves choices between multiple evils. If the evil of not acting violently outweighs the evil of acting violently, then you must act violently. But it is not a lie to teach children that violence is always wrong. it seems like we have a majority of parents who go with the convenient lie and fail to follow up Yes, if only parents would stop teaching their children that violence is wrong, there would be less violence in the world. You realize how rediculous that assertion is?