So, I guess it boils down to:
"Girls just-a wanna have fun-hun"
I popped in because someone told me that this was where all the babes where hangin' out... :p
That's what they always say...
A quick anecdote (dinner almost ready)...when my friends and I were Canadian small town hippies, we'd go park somewhere and light our joints and have a yakking good time. I actually taped some of these evenings. Getting together two years ago with one of that crowd, we lit a joint and listened to one of those tapes. There were three guys and one girl in the car, and she was a bright confident girl. But the tape knocked me over. She took up maybe one tenth of the conversation though there were only three of us. We just rode over top of her and had no notion we were doing it.
Or that we discuss a subject and continue on...not beating it to death....or seeing who can write their name in the snow and what not...but, rather that we watch others write their names in the snow just as well and contribute when we can, if we choose...its more important though that we like things to be a bit more upbeat on occassion...
yesh..like puffing out our chests....
it has a completely different effect on both ourselves and those around us.
Most of the time however, Ive found that by the time I get to a question, the thoughts Ive have, arguments I would have made, etc have already been posted, disected and gone on to other things. eh...its all good, on occassion I could actually contribute, it however is not so great of a deal if I do or not really, as I would rather take a more serious approach to such subjects and would have to actually consider my speech and spelling, which I also dont have much patience for around here. To handle the task successfully I would have to be tethered here 24/7.
Timber - I never felt like I had everyone's attention over there.
blatham- You have just discovered something that women have always known. Men love to dominate. As a result, women tend to stay in the background in serious conversations with guys present.
I remember reading some time back, that there is a school of thought that believes that women do better in same sex colleges. That is because they can grow and learn to reach their potential without having to go into competition with the men, which can be intimidating for women.
littlek- Are you saying that the guys were ignoring you, or talking over your head?
Guys probably watched Bush's SOTU speech and just listened. Women look for nuances like body language and hesitancy. Beady, shifty eyes and thin lips are a real negative for me! My mom told me never to trust beady eyes and thin lips!
i was thinking about that thread a while ago, timber, and realized that i'd found it boring after a day or two. it was like watching a soap opera. i kept looking in every 3 or 4 days for a while and saw the same people saying the same things. perhaps phrasing things slightly differently, but not enough to require regular tuning in. it was not an intellectual challenge. it was not filled with interesting writing or stimulating ideas. it may have changed since i last looked, but once i'm bored ...
i'm not suggesting that 'what are you wearing' is challenging, stimulating or filled with interesting writing by any means. Rather that my interest in politics is expressed in discussing my views in real-life discussions. hmmmm, and in direct contrast to blatham, i love Canadian politics - there is truly a spectrum of political positions to argue about errrrrrr discuss here.
Vietnamnurse - i listened to the speech tonight on the radio so that i'd only have the words to work with. Interestingly (i thought), Setanta didn't listen to it!
I didn't listen to the SOTU speech.
Phoenix, I don't think either of those options fit.... maybe I was thinking of a different politics thread. I'd have to go back and re-read.
Vietnamnurse- I agree that women process information differently than men (sorry for the generalization- I really can't make that statement about EVERY man). They also communicate differently, and maybe therein lies the problem.
In political discussions, as in sports, which are both male dominated, I perceive that the object is to defeat your opponent. Show him up. Tell him he is dead wrong. IMO women are more comfortable with win-win situations, with compromise, with negotiation and empathy.
beth,
I had planned not to watch because his verbal expression pains me. I don't blame Setanta for not watching the drama. Boilerplate is what someone in my group has described it. Locke, in my opinion, did a very fine job with his rebuttal presenting the country's problems up front and personal. The lips were thinner than usual.
I looked. I think I was largely talked over in US/UN/Iraq, except by Lash. I was ignored in the draft thread.
ehBeth, you drive home the matter of tastes and preferrences. I readily see that a thread mof that one's nature could be boring, perhaps very slow moving and even repetitious. There are subtexts and incidental digressions galore, and there is perhaps a bit much "Nit Picking", but some very fine nuances are developed, and some arguments are extremely well presented and supported. But, if ya don't go in much for that sort of thing, cool. I admit I'm uncomfortable on The Digression Threads. I enjoy them, and play in them regularly, but I often find them difficult to follow, and I sometimes feel "Out-of-my-depth" in them. I just gravitate toward "The Heavy Lifting Threads". I find them easier to handle, I guess. I'm sure glad the site offers such choices ... that's probably its crowning feature.
I notice about a quarter of "The Ladies" responding here indicate they participate in The Politics Threads regularly. I would imagine a similar proportion of The Politics crowd participates in "What are you wearing?".
timber
I've learned quite a lot by reading the political threads (that is, if I'm reading correctly). I do get bogged down in some of them and lose interest.
timber, what do those political people wear anyway?
hmmmmmm, in the office i'm in now, you'd find the reverse, Phoenix. My supervisor/buddy is the nice guy, negotiater, empathizer. I'm the hard-ass that gets sent to the mediations, tribunals, arbitrations. I take him my letters to see if they're too rough, he has me look at stuff that needs a tougher stance from the company. It's been an interesting role to move into. He was already here being the nice guy, so I got to/had to (?) take on the bad guy spot. He negotiates, I'm there for the win.
timber, just saw your post. I'll agree there are some well-crafted arguments and positions on the I/I thread. I do have difficulty with the ongoing polishing of points and nuances. My nature is very much of the 'get to the point and move on' type. That's likely why that thread and soap operas don't 'work' for me. I kept looking at the posts and thinking 'you already made that point. find something new to say.' I'm enormously patient with dogs, children and fools but i don't think the posters there fall in any of those categories.
