Do Women Find It Difficult Communicating Intellectually?

a reply to: lonesomerimbaud

Oh I don't mean to state that your intentions were bad. I think it's great we talk about these things with respect and openness.

I think on ATS though, were pretty gender blind a lot of time since we tend to focus on the topic and not the member. Come to think of it, it's been refreshing not to worry about such things.

~Tenth

a reply to: jacygirl


If you notice I was not making a statement in my title to this thread. I was asking a question. A question is very different to a statement. A question enquires. A question seeks an answer. When we ask questions it is because we are seeking information not expressing it.

If you look very carefully at your response you are accusing me of making a "sweeping statement". Why the hostility of that? Is it because you misunderstand my motives and my writing? I am asking you a question. That is all.

I would like to know what you think about history? Should it all be tossed aside because of the fact it is so male?

I have learned so much from women in writing, but it is all about victimhood and oppression. I am looking to the day when we have women culture heroes; in the Arts, in Science, etc. Female Einstein and female T S Eliot are what I seek.

I don't want culture to become shallow. We need the constant voice of development so I live in the hope that women can make their mark.

Am I so wrong in my concern when we look at all women kind? You guys (meaning ladies, too) will have to answer that.

a reply to: tothetenthpower

You're welcome Boss.

a reply to: lonesomerimbaud

You seem to be living the past somewhat. You're implying that women today are still under the collective male thumb that suppressed them in the past. Either that or you need to get out more and meet more women. In a library perhaps. Or a BDSM dungeon.

I've met women on the lower rungs of society that are very smart and well spoken. I've met women who have climbed the professional ladder who are dumber than a box of dirt. I've also met women from both classes that are the opposite of what I just pointed out. There is no putting a blanket over all women and saying they are the same intellectually. That just shows a lack of it for the person making that bed.

I understand the premise of this post and I agree that there should be a societal balance in terms of women bringing their intellect to the table, but I don't agree that there is a lot of work to be done to get there. The scales are still a bit unbalanced, but not nearly as much as they were in the past.

a reply to: lonesomerimbaud

There are many, many "intellectual" women poets and authors. All one has to do is check the internet.

Louisa May Alcott - Little Women

Jane Austen - Pride and Prejudice

Charlotte Bronte - Jane Eyre....

Emily Bronte - Wuthering Heights

Emily Dickinson - A light Exists in Spring

Have you heard of any of these women? There are many more.


I believe that YOU feel that men are superior to women and with this post you have tried to cut us down.

I care not who is deemed the superior in the gender battle. However, you need to dig a little deeper, do some research and possibly broaden YOUR mind.


Perhaps the proplem is that YOU are not interested in what women have to say. If you are not interested in what women have to say, why ask us to speak??

a reply to: lonesomerimbaud

Thanks for the clarification, but I do know the difference between a question and a statement.

Why the hostility?
Likely because the subject matter touched a nerve.

Speaking ONLY from my own personal experiences/relationships...I have suffered bruised male egos, childish pouting or dismissal (akin to "Don't worry your pretty little head about it...").
Talking to another man (not my partner)...results in jealousy from said partner.

I have a question too.
Why is it that when I do (on the rare occasion) have an interesting conversation with a man...they eventually steer the topic to sex? Yes I am enjoying our discussion about world events....and no, I don't want to see "Mr. Wrinkles".

I am sorry for sounding defensive...apparently I am.

jacygirl

a reply to: jacygirl

I have a question too. Why is it that when I do (on the rare occasion) have an interesting conversation with a man...they eventually steer the topic to sex? Yes I am enjoying our discussion about world events....and no, I don't want to see "Mr. Wrinkles"

I hope you don't mind if I jump in here Jacy. I have noticed this in the opposite direction in my own life. I've been having an awesome philosophical conversation with a lady friend, and somehow sex gets brought into it. Could it be that our sexuality is part of our nature, and the more we deny it, the more it defies our suppression of it? It's never really bothered me, but just wanted you to know it isn't one-sided.

a reply to: lonesomerimbaud

It is their nature to be good listeners, not thinkers. It is their nature to be the body, not the head. Men perceive, women conceive.

Men literally cannot listen as well as women, because a man's mind focuses more on perceiving, or understanding a thing, instead of feeling, and becoming a thing. Men cannot multitask as well as women, because they are so singularly focused on perceiving. Men cannot nurture as well as women, because they think with their mind, instead of feeling with their hearts. And men damn sure can't be as beautiful or tantalizing as women, as their bodies are the image of conception, or fruition, whereas a man's is just the image of a seeder or phallic.



But don't think one better than the other - think specialization - think eyes and ears.



Without women, men would war all day trying to force their perceptions into one another...

and here you're saying that you want women to think like men, to be as hard headed as men...

that's not good.

You shouldn't go against the force of life; against the spirit of conception; against concept reproduction; against God.

You think you want women to stop being materialistic (focused on becoming a good image/body) and women think they want men to stop being like boys (imaginative, perceptive, creative, rowdy) but if that ever actually happened, we would be screwed, and not in a fruitful way.

a reply to: lonesomerimbaud

Thank you for the encouragement.

I don't dismiss men in literature, my nature isn't that discriminatory.

Thanks also for your refreshing attitude and insight, now if only the rest of society could see the validity of treating women as intellectual equals instead of promoting superficiality.

originally posted by: lonesomerimbaud
I am only saying women's contribution here is to be encouraged.

This is the third time I've read that you think the women here need to be encouraged... And it grates on me a little. I don't need your encouragement. I'm not a little girl who is afraid or unsure and needs someone to help me so I can speak as you think I should.

I'm trying not to be, but I find myself pretty offended at your posts so far in this thread. But I'm not mad. Just a little chafed.

I have no trouble whatsoever speaking intellectually. Poetry is not my thing, so I'm never going to write a poem. I don't know why you think I should, or why you are even concerned about it. Women's accomplishments over the years are in many areas, including intellectualism, but Klassified's post highlights the problem historically. Very intelligent women HAVE been speaking and working for many years, it's just that the patriarchal system didn't recognize it.

"The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shown by man's attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can woman." - Darwin (1871)

"Identical education of the sexes is a crime before God and humanity, that physiology protests against and that experience weeps over." - Clarke (1873)

"Deficiency in reproductive power . . . can be reasonable attributed to the overtaxing of (women's) brains." - Spencer (1867)

"The 'woman's rights movement' is an attempt to rear, by the process of 'un-natural selection', a race of monstrosities - hostile alike to men, to normal women, to human society, and to the future development of our race." - Bagehut (1879)

Women's Intellectual Contributions to the Study of Mind and Society

originally posted by: lonesomerimbaud
I have learned so much from women in writing, but it is all about victimhood and oppression.

Do you see what you're saying? The women of history were struggling to overcome oppression. And you wonder why so many women wrote about it? Should they have ignored it? Pretended like it didn't exist?

I'm with you in disliking the distasteful grapevine gossip thing. But that's PART of what some women are. But just a part and just some women. I don't belong in the group and frankly, what you've said here sounds pretty condescending to me.

Some men don't care about anything more than their car, NASCAR and the Super Bowl and would choose to sit on the couch and ingest wings and beer any day than pick up a book. But I'm not going to go to "men" and say, "Look, men... there's more to you than that. I want to encourage you to develop your intellect and be all that you can be"... That's totally condescending. Instead, I pick and choose the men I hang with, and leave the others alone.

a reply to: newsoul

Good point and fair challenge. It is not that I feel superior in all honesty, I do not.

I want you to be here. I want you to better than me. I want female intellect to shine bright.

I know of all the authors you state. I mention Emily Dickinson earlier and I would only recommend her to anybody. I like what she has to say.

I wrote that I had read Alice Walker, Maya Angelo and you know I cried over the pages; that is how deep an impact and I vowed "never again" as I vow "never again" about what happened to the Jews.

For your short list I can list thousands! That is what I meant, the vacuity. The women you mention all write from a very traditional feminine point of view. They look at the world in terms of sexuality and relationships; Heathcliffe and all the other male characters are tall, dark, handsome beasts with an anti hero charm. They teach me about the psyche of women big time. Those women learned their art from reading the classics, Greek, Roman and English.

On one level I am not as interested in sensual poetry and literature. I am interested in social and historical enlightenment, new thoughts, concepts and experiences. Is it that these do not interest women as much? For example, Charles Dickens wrote all about the horrors of Victorian society. He was a moralist. On the levels that matter people listened to him and still do for the reminder they give of certain pitfalls and what not to do. Men can be very powerful moralists and catalysts as we know. It is not all bad.

By the power of his words Joseph Conrad even influenced poets like TS Eliot. Both have been a huge influence on me intellectually. Are they of use to women for the incredible insight they give? May be women want more to read Brontes, etc?

You raise the question is my intellect male biased I guess? Yes it is because I am male. I have and do take an interest in female authors as I have told you. What I have read is informative about the psyche of women.

I bemoaned my own experience. It is my experience to bemoan. I would just love to see a few great women artists that I can culturally "heroine worship", like I can so many males. I certainly valued my ex in that way and still do. How dare she have squandered such talent in the most barbaric act of self murder!

Put some more books on the shelves of deep and penetrating commentary on this thing we call life, be it poetry, literature or anything else.

I must back off a little now. Too many words being written too quickly and I don't want to start hamming myself. Hope this was of some value to somebody somewhere. Just wanted to bother and try with something that interested me.



I

a reply to: Klassified

Aww thanks Klassified! Of course I don't mind!

I guess it's called 'stimulating conversation' for a reason, lol.

jacygirl

a reply to: lonesomerimbaud

It could also be that men and women are different and see the world in different ways. You seem to be asking for women to think about and see the world in the same way that men think about and see the world. That's not going to happen as often. Why are you thinking that the way women think about the world is less than the way men see the world?

There is value in seeing the big ideas through the perspective of the woman's eye. This is why the best female minds are held in the esteem they are held in. You may as well ask why more men don't distill the big ideas through the domestic and relationship lens.

Is the big idea any less worthy because it is distilled through different subject matter? There is value in a different perspective.

Try reading "The Yellow Wallpaper" sometime. It is as fascinating and chilling a story of madness.

Maybe it's a "you" thing?

Maybe women have difficulty communicating with you intelligently? Maybe you project a bit of chauvinism onto women in general and they simply choose not to engage with you?

With regard to your historical "analysis" ..women have only had suffrage in the US for less than a century. They have only been "liberated" for half of that time. And, worldwide, there is still a long way to go as they are still viewed as property, sex slaves or servants in several cultures. So when you lament that their writings are full of "oppression and victimhood", that's been the bulk of the female experience throughout human history.

Maybe you should look more at the stats in the last fifty years?

Just throwing this out for the OP, my favorite female writer: Margaret Atwood.

Read The Handmaid's Tale, then maybe Oryx and Crake (if you haven't.) Great female writers certainly exist. Find them and enjoy them.

(She has other fantastic works if you want more.)

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: lonesomerimbaud
I am only saying women's contribution here is to be encouraged.

This is the third time I've read that you think the women here need to be encouraged... And it grates on me a little. I don't need your encouragement. I'm not a little girl who is afraid or unsure and needs someone to help me so I can speak as you think I should.

I'm trying not to be, but I find myself pretty offended at your posts so far in this thread. But I'm not mad. Just a little chafed.

I have no trouble whatsoever speaking intellectually. Poetry is not my thing, so I'm never going to write a poem. I don't know why you think I should, or why you are even concerned about it. Women's accomplishments over the years are in many areas, including intellectualism, but Klassified's post highlights the problem historically. Very intelligent women HAVE been speaking and working for many years, it's just that the patriarchal system didn't recognize it.

"The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shown by man's attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can woman." - Darwin (1871)

"Identical education of the sexes is a crime before God and humanity, that physiology protests against and that experience weeps over." - Clarke (1873)

"Deficiency in reproductive power . . . can be reasonable attributed to the overtaxing of (women's) brains." - Spencer (1867)

"The 'woman's rights movement' is an attempt to rear, by the process of 'un-natural selection', a race of monstrosities - hostile alike to men, to normal women, to human society, and to the future development of our race." - Bagehut (1879)

Women's Intellectual Contributions to the Study of Mind and Society

originally posted by: lonesomerimbaud
I have learned so much from women in writing, but it is all about victimhood and oppression.

Do you see what you're saying? The women of history were struggling to overcome oppression. And you wonder why so many women wrote about it? Should they have ignored it? Pretended like it didn't exist?

I'm with you in disliking the distasteful grapevine gossip thing. But that's PART of what some women are. But just a part and just some women. I don't belong in the group and frankly, what you've said here sounds pretty condescending to me.

Some men don't care about anything more than their car, NASCAR and the Super Bowl and would choose to sit on the couch and ingest wings and beer any day than pick up a book. But I'm not going to go to "men" and say, "Look, men... there's more to you than that. I want to encourage you to develop your intellect and be all that you can be"... That's totally condescending. Instead, I pick and choose the men I hang with, and leave the others alone.

No I don't dislike the grapevine gossip thing. It is very vital I know. Men cannot compete with women on that level. I admit that much.

I irritate you? Jolly good. I don't mean it in a bad way. I am just trying to encourage thought in women. I have achieved that here with you. I have got you as a woman to tell me what you think in answer to what I wanted to know. I am sure I will irritate you plenty more. I'm not here to be popular. I would not even want to be.

You know your words are written as though you are battling me for being "encouraging". Should I discourage you then? Or should I do nothing at all and leave you to it? I expect you might say "Leave me to it". If I leave you to it I am having no input. You may as well say "Silence before me". Nope, I will not be silent toward you.

I have ruffled your feathers. I have got you to value and think about female quality literature and the reason why this deeper area of thought might be very vital to civilization.

Finally, can you deny the victimhood of the women I have mentioned? You seem to think I used that word negatively. No way! I use it with all respect. As with Christ and the early Christians, The Jews, The Witches and victims of the Inquisition victimhood is the case.

So what is our argument then? I was bemoaning the short list of women in the canon of history and literature. I can quote thousands of male classical poets and authors and really very few female. I want there to be more females represented in high culture and important evolving peaks of our development. I am hoping you want that, too and sure you do. I will continue to encourage you, even you personally. I do that for men, too.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: lonesomerimbaud

Thank you for the encouragement.

I don't dismiss men in literature, my nature isn't that discriminatory.

Thanks also for your refreshing attitude and insight, now if only the rest of society could see the validity of treating women as intellectual equals instead of promoting superficiality.

You totally understood me. Thank you.

originally posted by: lonesomerimbaud
I am just trying to encourage thought in women.

I know... And you think we need your encouragement or will benefit from it somehow... If you truly thought of us as equals, I doubt you'd feel the need to encourage us by gender. If you wanted to encourage people in general to be more intellectual, I would have supported you 100%, and your title and posts would not read as they do.

Truth is, women ARE intellectual and have no trouble with deep thought and don't need your encouragement. For you to encourage thought in women is like me encouraging men to think about sex.

I have got you to value and think about female quality literature and the reason why this deeper area of thought might be very vital to civilization.

The credit for me thinking about or valuing ANYTHING does not go to you.

I can quote thousands of male classical poets and authors and really very few female.

That is a shortcoming of yours, as I see it.

a reply to: lonesomerimbaud

Thank you for your honesty and openness. Perhaps it is that women write with more emotion, we don't normally temper our hearts. You did mention Shakespeare and Lord Byron in your opening post, let me point out that they wrote with sensuality and emotion as well. It is a personal choice I suppose, what one gravitates toward, what one can relate with.

I have a deep connection with the written word. It moves me and inspires me, written by male or female. In my mind it is more important to form decisions from life itself, not from the words in a book. Although they move me, they do not define me.

I believe that you are looking for something. You will find it when you stop looking in books. Of course these are just the ramblings of an emotional woman

a reply to: lonesomerimbaud

Women do not lack any intellect, and in fact may have the upper hand on men in this case, but by judging from art, musical and literary history, it seems men have the upper hand in creativity.