Friday, March 31, 2006
today i...
read the book wild at heart, because my dad told me it was based on ridiculous stereotypes of masculinity, and my brother told me it was the most genius book ever written. the debate over it among the boys in my family sparked my curiosity. so i decided i needed to throw in my own (well-researched) two cents. i won't pretend to know whether or not these generalizations hold true for most men, but they made sense to me. the parts about women seemed right on. for me anyway. i don't mind being a stereotype if its true.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
that book does semm stereotypical to me. i really think it is ridiculous but i am trying to temper my response. i hate the idea that men and women ARE something inherently. they might be inclined toward certain traits due to evolution and chemical make-up, but to say that they have an absolute meaning as men or women is foolish.
no need to temper your response. i'm not a guy so, as i said, i really have no idea if these statements hold true and i don't really have a personal connection with it. if you think it is total bullshit you are welcome to say so. as a woman i would say most of the observations about girls are fairly accurate, although they seem pretty shallow and easily justifiable for both genders. for example: 1) women want to be chased/sought after... true. who doesn't want to be pursued? who doesn't want to feel worthy of the kind of love that would make someone FIGHT for you? 2) women want to be part of the adventure... true. but most people want an equal partnership in their relationships and would like to be valued for their own strengths, regardless of their gender. 3) women want and need to feel beautiful and cherised (delighted in)... also true. i think this has something to do with culture though and the way men and women interact with each other. of course women feel they need to be beautiful, they are expected to be so. i don't think this actually has to do with something physical but most girls get that confused. when you see two people who are seriously in love it doesn't really matter how physically beautiful the girl actually is, as long as her husband/boyfriend thinks she is beautiful, that is all that matters to her. i'm guessing the reason we get this confused so much with being physically beautiful is because girls are very aware of how visual guys are and feel the need to be pretty in order to earn their love. i think everyone in a relationship needs the security of knowing they are "delighted in", guys included. I'm not convinced that it is gender-specific OR that it really has anything at all to do with physical beauty.
Maybe you are right in that we do not fill roles merely because of our gender (although i do think much of who we are is predetermined by genetics, but that is a whole different topic). I don't think the ideas presented hold true across cultural or historical lines. But maybe they hold some truth for right here, right now? what do you think?
Good answer, Terry.
What I hate about that book is how people respond to it.
Example: 'no, ash, it's okay that I like killing people 'cause I'm a guy.'
'No it's not.'
'No. it is. read this book. it will tell you.'
So I read the book and came back to him and said, '...I think you missed something.'
: )
(and by smile I do not mean...well, you know.)
I'd probably lean more towards your dad's side. I only got a handful of things, if that, out of this book that I really carried with me. I don't consider myself a manly, outdoorsy, rustic male. I actually like some thing that may seem less manly. I think God's created me that way, though, and I don't think I have any gender confusion because of it.
well im basically a woman so i cant answer this either. i did like what he had to say about women though
Post a Comment