Shame and Humiliation

[Safe_Bet]

...and in some studies, males who had to do housework had much higher stress levels, it represented a loss of status, and traditionally status for men translates almost directly into economic status, which is why it's stressful to begin with.

More recent studies indicate that more men do help with the housework now, and that men who help with the housework get laid more frequently - i.e., social values have shifted to some extent, and while this isn't equality, per se, it does reflect more balanced and symmetrical divisions of labor - in the old days, the wife could not say no, it was grounds for divorce, re: frigidity, etc., now, perhaps they are getting laid as a reward, or maybe their wives/girlfriends are simply not so worn out and/or depressed from neglect.

i.e., it often isn't the work itself that's wearing, it's that you're always doing it alone and unappreciated.

There are many shifts taking place here, many forces at work, both progressive and reactionary, and I find it more useful to think in terms of layers and facets, agents and roles than in monolithic oversimplifications, there are just too many variables to fit into one simple paradigm.

Please cite which studies these are. I REALLY want to see where it is proven that men are getting laid more because they are doing more housework.

 

[xssve]

What's it to you? Still, if you really don't know how to use google, I'll help you out: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=men+sex+housework&btnG=Search

Here's the first site: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=4397683

 

[voluptuary_manque]

What's it to you? Still, if you really don't know how to use google, I'll help you out: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=men+sex+housework&btnG=Search

Here's the first site: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=4397683

Snerk! It's probably because the wife isn't as tired if she only has to part of it instead of all of it . . . along with working full-time like most do these days. I know Mama's libido is a lot higher on her days off.

 

[Safe_Bet]

What's it to you? Still, if you really don't know how to use google, I'll help you out: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=men+sex+housework&btnG=Search

Here's the first site: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=4397683

Thank you for resorting to a personal attack when I DARE ask you to validate a statement.



.

 

[xssve]

Thank you for resorting to a personal attack when I DARE ask you to validate a statement.



.

Glad to return the favor, I wish you were willing to show me the same courtesy.

 

[xssve]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Safe_Bet View Post
Hon, I wouldn't call you a "bitch" OR a "real man" because that would be using a stereotype and would be hateful. It would be like what you say about Cloudy, just because your wife that left you happened to be an American Indian, as well. It would be like the demeaning comments you make about Stella and myself because we have sex lives and you have difficulty with that because of your erectile dysfunction. I get all that. But, trust me, you life will be SO much better if you would just try not to hate so much. Really. Please try?

Lol.

What did I say about Cloudy?

Yellow journalism vs Purple prose, try highlighting. I call Cloudy a bitch because she is one, it has nothing to do with her being native American.

I've never minded being called a bitch. For years I had a bumpersticker on my car that said "I'm not a bitch, I'm THE bitch."

I own it. I'm a bitch.

Anything else?

 

[AllardChardon]

Back to frigid women for just a moment.

I am not trying to exclude any group of women, just address the sexually healthy ones who are not interested in their husbands. I think it might be possible that these women are bored by the sameness of their marriage and as BB King said so well, "The Thrill is Gone." But if a beautiful cabana boy were to happen by with a tray of refreshments and gave her the eye, it might be another story. I guess that is where I was going. They must be bored with their men, which does happen.

Stella, you remind me of a female version of the Shemani in Little Big Man, I think that is correct?. The character was male and kinda female, very nicely put together. I also enjoyed the character called a Contrary quite a bit. He said hello when he meant good-bye and good night when he meant good day.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Back to frigid women for just a moment.

I am not trying to exclude any group of women, just address the sexually healthy ones who are not interested in their husbands. I think it might be possible that these women are bored by the sameness of their marriage and as BB King said so well, "The Thrill is Gone." But if a beautiful cabana boy were to happen by with a tray of refreshments and gave her the eye, it might be another story. I guess that is where I was going. They must be bored with their men, which does happen.

But a woman who is tired of her husband isn't frigid-- she's tired of her husband. Frigid describes a sexual dysfunction, not a dysfunctional relationship.

Stella, you remind me of a female version of the Shemani in Little Big Man, I think that is correct?. The character was male and kinda female, very nicely put together. I also enjoyed the character called a Contrary quite a bit. He said hello when he meant good-bye and good night when he meant good day.

I loved both of those characters as well! They are in the same scene together-- the Contrary says; "you must come to my teepee for dinner, I have a wife and four horses." and Little Big Man says "I have a horse and four wives."

 

[xssve]

Ah, the Victorian obsession with nymphomania and frigidity - women were routinely treated or institutionalized for both.

It's sometimes easy to forget that women as a social class have been emerging from what was, in many respects a de facto fascist regime that extends beyond antiquity and into prehistory, for less than half a century - it does not surprise me at all that it get's heated, I'm just trying to stay on my feet and remain objective.

 

[xssve]

IOW, at best the second and the beginning of a third generation since the sexual revolution.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I dunno, man- from my side, that fascist regime might have receded but it's left all kinds of artifacts, like fish after the tide. And every once in a while, someone shoves a dead fish up my nose.

Not so easy to forget. The stench is everywhere.

 

[AllardChardon]

I stand corrected. Frigidity is a sexual dysfunction. And according to the article posted by XssVe, they are coming up with drugs that will help to overcome this issue, testosterone, mainly. I still have enough for three women. But I am not a nymphomaniac... anymore.

 

[xssve]

I thought that was interesting, apparently diabetes can cause it.

The fact is, that women's reproductive costs are so high that before birth control and medical hygiene, a lot of them did practically have to be coerced or brainwashed into to doing it - the infant mortality rate was very high, and so was the birthing mortality rate: alarming numbers of women died in childbirth, giving us such archetypes as the wicked stepmother.

There is always an element of society that's wringing it's hands over low birth rates, the Romans had them, and we have them.

In fact our Christian family values pretty much come from the Italians, rather than the Christians, early Christians were often dualists, and preached against having children, as this extended Satan's reign on Earth - they were ascetics, didn't bathe, eagerly martyred themselves, etc., and in certain ways they were politically degendered accordingly.

True gender equality, I am hypothesizing, comes only at the price of foregoing reproduction, when reproduction enters the picture, one must suffice with equivalence and/or equity.

The question then becomes: is that a step up or a step down for a woman - or just a step sideways? I suspect that different women would answer that different ways.

 

[xssve]

True gender equality, I am hypothesizing, comes only at the price of foregoing reproduction, when reproduction enters the picture, one must suffice with equivalence and/or equity.

The question then becomes: is that a step up or a step down for a woman - or just a step sideways? I suspect that different women would answer that different ways.

i.e., it has long been my opinion that if reproduction is taken off the table, what is left theoretically, is roleplaying: all gender privileges on either side are rendered effectively moot.

In praxis, there are still enculturation and hormonal issues that will arise, and how successful one is at crossing the boundaries or refraining from retreating into traditional gender political defensiveness depends on the desire to do so and the amount of self control one is capable of mustering to do it - i.e., women may still expect men to act like real men, men expect women to act femme, etc., out of sheer, blind hormonal impulse.

It is an important question, in my mind, and increasingly so with women in the workplace - I'm not at all convinced that a woman who plays the same power games men play is technically an improvement, while to hypothesize that women have some innovative contribution that derives from the perspective of their gender means one has to define, if only roughly, what these differences might be, and bear in mind that they too may contain hidden inefficiencies that might surface in time.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

You've forgotten that lovely word "frigid."

You're right. I stand entirely corrected.

 

[shereads]

I stand entirely corrected.

What a lovely image. Makes me squirm in my chair.

[/slutty threadjack]

 

[xssve]

This is shifting somewhat towards towards Stella's gender role thread, but I really don't want to hijack that one by making an on topic post.

I'm right now leaning towards viewing it as a management issue rather than a political one because it's less contentious, and I do think it has to do with subtler issues of shame and humiliation - women are often paid less because they don't demand higher pay, i.e., they are more reticent about negotiation - a sort of shame, i.e., appearing too greedy possibly (here ya go S_B, a whole book on the subject) - management, of course, simply doesn't worry about this a great deal, and are presumably not inclined to look a gift horse in the mouth - which actually has a negative effect on both sexes from a labor standpoint, i.e., that women are willing to work for less drives wages down across the board - shame on you.

Another interesting article about shame is this reprint of a 1921 article in the NYT: Do Women Pay? (PDF), which I think adds an interesting historical perspective on the issue of professional vs. domestic responsibility, and how women are enculturated to respond to this situation - there is a distinct, if slightly tongue in cheek, scolding tone to the article, written by a woman.

Almost a hundred years later, we're still debating it.

 

[Stella_Omega]

It is an important question, in my mind, and increasingly so with women in the workplace - I'm not at all convinced that a woman who plays the same power games men play is technically an improvement,

It's probably an improvement from her point of view-- simply becase she is now able to play the game instead of being a pawn in it.

while to hypothesize that women have some innovative contribution that derives from the perspective of their gender means one has to define, if only roughly, what these differences might be, and bear in mind that they too may contain hidden inefficiencies that might surface in time.

To my mind that "perspective of gender" is a misunderstanding. I think that gender differences are physiological and innate, but not monolithic, we are so very variable.

The roles applied to these differences are cultural. Women have a perspective derived from their enforced role as lesser in society, and our society doesn't value that much...

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I stand corrected. Frigidity is a sexual dysfunction. And according to the article posted by XssVe, they are coming up with drugs that will help to overcome this issue, testosterone, mainly. I still have enough for three women. But I am not a nymphomaniac... anymore.

Oh good! That means we poor men now have some small chance of keeping up with you. Phew!

 

[Stella_Omega]

This is shifting somewhat towards towards Stella's gender role thread, but I really don't want to hijack that one by making an on topic post.

I sure wish you would!
It would be nice for Doc to have his thread back, I'd bet.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

It's probably an improvement from her point of view-- simply becase she is now able to play the game instead of being a pawn in it.
To my mind that "perspective of gender" is a misunderstanding. I think that gender differences are physiological and innate, but not monolithic, we are so very variable.

The roles applied to these differences are cultural. Women have a perspective derived from their enforced role as lesser in society, and our society doesn't value that much...

Even given the variability of women, I still find it easier to work with one in charge than I do with a man. With a woman I am rarely caught up in the dominence games that power male existance. Respectful cooperation is easier when I don't have to climb up on some other guy's chest and jump up and down until it's established that there are aspects of this business where I'm the boss. I think everyone's happier that way.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Even given the variability of women, I still find it easier to work with one in charge than I do with a man. With a woman I am rarely caught up in the dominence games that power male existance. Respectful cooperation is easier when I don't have to climb up on some other guy's chest and jump up and down until it's established that there are aspects of this business where I'm the boss. I think everyone's happier that way.

Come on over to my thread baby.

 

[xssve]

S'allright, it's good for your morale to have a thread of your own to direct as you wish, and I'm just teasing you - I almost did and changed my mind, maybe later you all seem to be having fun and I'm is a serious mood. We're already on this bent over here, so rather than confuse the threads I'll just go with it, we're already doing three threads here.

Speaking of which, in musing on Goldie Hawn and her stock dizzy Blonde act, it occurred to me that Streisand offered an interesting counterpoint: playful and witty, sexy and always feminine but independent and serious, she played the coquette with deliberate sarcasm, batting her huge eyelashes in exaggerated pantomime in intimate moments, she demanded respect in a very direct, businesslike, New York kind of way.

 

[AllardChardon]

Is having children a step forward? For me, yes. I think most humans who decide to have a child and rear it to adulthood, are better off for the experience. I have four adult children. I know several single people of both sexes and they just don't seem to fair as well, alone every night. Especially as they get older.

I have thought about and discussed shame and humilitation with my family over the last week. Anyone can be humiliated when they find they have been walking around with snot on their nose and no one said a thing. And shame is just about as easy. You tell everyone you are giving up candy just to be discovered devouring a Hershey's chocolate bar.

Transitory shame and humiliation is just that. It comes and goes. It is the lasting or eternal shame and humiliation we are talking about here and that, IMO, belongs to the dogma of heaven and hell, in which I do not believe.

I don't have much shame and hardly ever feel humilitated except transitorially anymore. But then I was raised without formal religion, my dad being a reincarnationist. Free love and the drugs the sixties had to offer helped to steer me away from guilt and shame and I remain eternally grateful for that.

My ex, born and bred a Catholic, has serious shame and humiliation issues and is, therefore, the basis for alot of my pondering. We spared our children the ordeal, much to the dismay of the Catholic grandparents. My ex, was in full agreement , of course. The years at Catholic school as an altar boy was not a pleasant experience for him. And no, he was not molested or even hit on. He never suspected any priest or nun of having a sexual thought much less acting on one.

I, on the other hand, was felt up by a priest once after Mass during a hug. He cupped his hands under my breasts and I thought, Yeah, you know a good set when you see them don't you, Monsignor? LOL

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I sure wish you would!
It would be nice for Doc to have his thread back, I'd bet.

No, fuck it. *L* I don't want it anymore.

I believe there are innate differences between men and women under the bell curves, but I'm not going to try and argue that here anymore.