One of the unfortunate consequences of the dominant gender paradigm…

Don’t expect any sophisticated analysis or world changing insights in the next few moments here. I was a party last night at a friend’s apartment. It was quite a wild evening. On a brief tangent my friend’s boyfriend drives me crazy. He was in his full modus operandi. Loudly pontificating on the merits of a people’s violent revolution over the state, and slapping women’s assess as often as he can get away with it. Apparently class concientiousness does not neccesate any progressive thinking about gender relations. Grr. I’m getting very sidetracked here, I digress.

I met K at this party last night. We enjoyed a breadth of wonderful conversation: animal rights, role playing games (think “nerds” not S&M), poetry, environmental activism, and so on. I was very happy to have met a kindred intellect. However, there was a “problem” that could very likely derail our potential friendship. K was a particularly attractive woman. Very often I find that women, particularly those who are sexually attractive by popular definition, are very distrustful of men’s motives who apparently want to be friends with them.

I think this is likely a natural development that many women get from being constantly pursued from every angle, even from “nice guys”. I think it is valid and understandable. But it still makes me sad that people would otherwise be kindred intellects and wonderful friends may not be because of that kind of systemic reality. Thankfully, I think my authenticity comes through pretty well.

Hugs everyone.
N

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Ethics, Gender, Sexuality. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to One of the unfortunate consequences of the dominant gender paradigm…

  1. desipis says:

    Very often I find that women… are very distrustful of men’s motives … from being constantly pursued from every angle …
    I think it is valid and understandable.

    Is it acceptable to form discriminatory views based on personal experience? I don’t think I’ve really seen it accepted as a defence against claims of sexism/racism/etc.

    • N says:

      2.Strawmen belong in Oz. It may not be logically consistent with the way you characterize feminist/anti-*ist ideology, i.e. absolute, but nevertheless I certainly find the distrust understandable.

      Any assessment that anyone makes of a newly introduced person is going to be categorical to some extent. What else could it be if you have no first hand knowledge of this individual?

      Perhaps some people would begrudge someone simply the existence of a socialized or subconcious prejudice. I would generally not. I certainly would criticise someone for allowing that prejudice to unfairly influence their choices regarding another human being, especially if that person is leveraging the power and resources of an institution against the one they are prejudicial against.

      Its difficult to say whether I was experiencing a genuine little bit of prejudice, or allowing a tiny, little bit of insecurity to creep in. For the sake of the argument, lets say its the former. No, lets take it a step further. Lets say she is a person who believes that men should serve no purpose beyond providing gametes. In this circumstance she is only denying me access to her company and nothing else. I have no claim to her person or company anyway so the net effect for me is negligible.

      If anything it would be that prejudicial person’s loss. My life has been enriched my a wide diversity of people. The hypothetical “man-hater” just loses out.

Comments are closed.