5/21/07

Essentialism, patriarchy and other riff raff - A rant

After sifting through a battered copy of the loathsome bulwark of essentialism, ‘Dr.’ Gray’s “Men are from Mars and women are from Venus” at my friend’s apartment, I couldn’t help but balk at the sheer idiocy of the people who bought the craptastic book and made it a gynormous bestseller in the first place. But on further internal soul searching however, I started pondering on why cheerleaders of equal rights and other good stuff still subscribed to the rigid gender roles laid down by the heterosexist patriarchy, like my friend, for instance. When I offhandedly criticized the book in front of him, he got unusually defensive and mumbled something about how I was ignorant about ‘biological superiority’ (his words) and how I wouldn’t understand because I was an exception to the norm, anyway.


Groan.


Here I was, faced with the dreadful prospect of dealing with my least favorite argument supporting the ‘natural superiority’ of males; and all I wanted to do was to crawl in a hole and lay there. Now don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t fear which made me want to crawl into a hole, it was my own capricious temper which I was worried about. I wanted to coldly refute his points without blowing my top or drowning his theories in a barrage of expletives, but I couldn’t trust my volatile anger. And I just sat there, incensed.


Since my blog has always been a handy tool for quelling my anger management issues, it only made sense for me to elaborate on my not-so-kind opinions on essentialism and its ugly siblings, like biological determinism (barf) over here.


Basically, the essentialist position on gender states that there are distinctively feminine and distinctively masculine traits that exist outside of social and cultural conditioning and because of such qualities being wired into our brains, we must irrevocably accept gender oppression simply as part of who we are as a species. This stance is outrageous, primarily because it offers little or no insight as to how women and men can work towards changing or improving the status quo or even human nature, come to think of it. This asinine line of reasoning has been used for thousands of years to perpetuate patriarchy as a universal system ‘rooted’ in human essence and it has also been used to corroborate sexism and discrimination against women be it financially, emotionally, politically, mentally or physically. It validates the notion that masculine and feminine traits are diametrically opposite but complementary to each other if and only if, men and women act according to conventional gender roles. It oversimplifies complex social patterns related to biology, psychology, genetics, history and what have you and boxes it into an extremely narrow worldview in general. For instance, if disparities between the genders are a part of our very being and patriarchal hegemony is indisputable, why is it necessary for humans to indulge in unspeakable amounts of brutality and oppression to maintain patriarchy? Or if aggression and gender oppression are so entrenched in the male psyche and passivity and dependence make up the feminine essentia, how does it explain the fact that women through the ages have been standing up for their rights and speaking up against male dominance and coercion?


Biological determinism (which is basically a form of essentialism) especially, has been used to dubiously ‘prove’ that men just happen to be smarter, stronger, rational, more aggressive etc * and thus more suited to rule rather than follow. This is utterly preposterous however, as biological determinism fails to account for the immense variations found amid men and amid women and it also fails to address that such variations far outnumber the disparities between individuals of opposite genders.


Paradoxically, the very same explanations which ‘prove’ that men are smarter, stronger, more rational et al also point to the fact that it is in man’s innate nature to dominate and to be violent, and his need to control translates into oppression. According to this line of thought, women are a ready made outlet for man’s need to coerce, as women are ‘naturally’ submissive. It perpetuates the dodgy, absolutist view that sex-linked inclinations are undeniably written into our DNA and our brains. But this kind of reasoning reeks of “boys will be boys” or “men are that way because that’s the way men are”, a circular dead end argument which essentialism basically pushes us into. More importantly, essentialism ignores the prominent role that fear plays in most men’s lives, it ignores the fact that the driving force behind the system of patriarchy is a compelling association between fear and control, specifically male control^.


Proponents of such scientific truths often forget that social and cultural postulations about ‘manliness’, ‘femininity’ and the relationship patterns between the genders, often bolster and shape these allegedly neutral theories.


Now I am in no way denying the obvious fact that differences do exist between the sexes. But using a pair of breasts or internally placed genetelia as subliminal justification or scientific attestation for the subjugation and disparagement of women is just ludicrous, and not to mention, completely unnecessary while discussing issues pertaining to sexual emancipation and equal rights.


* An ignorant, yet common offshoot of this line of thinking is that women just happen to be morally superior to men. This view is as asinine as ‘men are obviously better due to….’
Inverting the same convoluted logic will only push us smack dab into a wall of dead-end essentialism, yet again.

^ Future post alert.

Very important update: Please pepuls go and read this post by a man who is an expert in amongst other things, women with '7 to 10 ratio of hips' and how they are best suited for mating, how women cannot dream of sex without thinking of love and how a woman's 'unconcious mind' can decode the immune system of a man in 3 seconds flat. Please, go.read.it.pronto.

[Thank you crumbs, for the link!]

65 comments:

Anonymous said...

Great post! In particular, these two points are great: 1) "...why is it necessary for humans to indulge in unspeakable amounts of brutality and oppression to maintain patriarchy?" And two: "...women through the ages have been standing up for their rights and speaking up against male dominance and coercion?" Very well put. I will be using these points as such when I get into this debate.

As far as the issue in general, unfortunately, patriarchy seems to be getting more intrenched in all societies. One of the tools being used is TV, which is one reason why I stopped watching it seven years ago. As far as I can see, the main war going on right now is not in Iraq, Israel/Palestine, Afghanistan, the Congo etc., it's going on between males and females, and not just one race/ethnicity/religion of people, but all. I am a male (check out the etymology of male--I think you'll be surprised...or maybe not...), and I can tell you and other females, this War on Women is very intentional. I hear it, see it, and sometimes participate in it (inadvertently...if I may believe so). I have cut down and discourage/speak out against it when other males do it too. So, maybe there's a little hope there...but something much more substantial needs to be done to end this...and it does need to end. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

"...essentialism ignores the prominent role that fear plays in most men’s lives, it ignores the fact that the driving force behind the system of patriarchy is a compelling association between fear and control, specifically male control."

Could you expand on this thought. Where does the fear exactly stem from and why does it exist?

Rohini said...

Excellently put as usual. I do firmly believe that differences exist but these differences are relative strengths rather than tools/ excuses to belittle or dominate women.

pRicky said...

Ok first fact one: men are more vulnerrable to survive. there are factually more chances of women being born... its to do with the fact that y chromosomes are weaker and find it hard to survive. and anyhow most boys die during and after birth. Also this was very stupidly equalised by killing the girl child by hand... but thats a point for another day...
Second, oversimplified notion?
I really need to understand why would you ever go into managing your eruptive anger on a subject like this if you werent being defensive yourself?
third, patriarchy now is spread not because of the psychological adv and physical strength its just so cause its become a norm for the feminists and the pro emancipation groups to consider every man indulginf in it. Its about searching for patriarchal brutality.
Whats to defend? there are stereotypes on both sides. They arent all stereotypes.
Why his book is a hit because of marketting and use of the age old man women explained topic.
As far as why would you be any different then any other woman would have two consequences
one you are umm a guy in a girls body
two all other women are beneath your superiority
while you make neither claims.
I am sure 'different' is a paradoxical subject...
but later...

Vidya said...

MAFMWAFV is a pop culture book.Pop culture books have less fact and more interpretation/extrapolation. But then I heard this same spiel in a management class on "Leadership" where the instructor and the text told me that the leadership styles of men and women are different.Upon arguing for proof and asking how experimental results get formed as theory, she said, for accuracy it should have been worded with "On average" but then many texts think that this is understood and omit it.

Fact: Research has shown that brains of Men and women process information differently.
>> Shown > Not conclusively proved
>> Different > Not superior or smarter
>> Different > Not always.

Statistical data based on normal distribution.So it is always On an average (say 60-70%) women are better at language processing and men at spatial or whatever. So that still leaves a huge chunk of the population in the spectrum sector.

>>Another obviously ignored fact These are not polarities but there exists a spectrum and a range.

Drunken Master said...

You run into some really cool people.

Also, I bet the guy was just trying to cover for the fact that he actually had that book and came up with the excuse/reason.

Either that or he's as crazy as the person in your previous post - No red-blooded male in his right mind will ever have that or any other self-help book lying around in his apartment, be it his wife's, girlfriend's, lover's, mother's, sister's, roommates, friends...whoever!

crumbs said...

excellent points, and i could not agree more. sure there must be biological differences between men and women (er...duh!) but i hardly think that does anything to this whole men and biologically superior, and women are morally better deal.
and about patriarchy, the weird fact is that the world was not ALWAYS wired that way,there are countless instances of societies where women were given much more power than men (i vaguely remeber reading an article in "The Week" about this being the case with the Nair society (i think) in Kerala some years ago, where women had much more decision making power, which apparently they abused to boot!i cant be sure of the exact facts here though, this is purely bits of memory)
oh while we are on the topic, check out this article:

http://www.ibnlive.com/blogs/mathewsjnedumpara/863/34861/biology-versus-law.html

it was so ridiculously funny, I had tears in my eyes at the end of it! its appalling that they actually allow people to publish stuff like this online.

Szerelem said...

Biological determinism has been just so harmful over the years, I always find it shocking that people still subscribe to this view.

La vida Loca said...

Hey I thought 'women are from bras and men are from penis' was published in the 80's..not the 18th century....

sheesh

That Armchair Philosopher said...

"After sifting through a battered copy of the loathsome bulwark of essentialism, ‘Dr.’ Gray’s “Men are from Mars and women are from Venus” at my friend’s apartment, I couldn’t help but balk at the sheer idiocy of the people who bought the craptastic book and made it a gynormous bestseller in the first place"


And thats when my brain froze and I started seeing spiders all around me.. Its 48 minutes later than I can actually type.

:P

Sudha said...

now, wait a second! I read that book and it has nothing in it about "biological superiority".

And the book also just says men and women r different, never says men r superior. wat kind of a dickhead reads a book about psychological differences between the sexes and thinks its about "biological superiority". Arrrggghhhh!!!

Good post as always.

whyisthat said...

What do you do when a kid is creating ruckus?
1)you use the cane.
2)or try to understand that the kid is seeking attention.. and you give it to him.

Now the kid is a 28 year old man.. but he is still the same. Superiority in physical strength(I hope that is an agreeable fact) leads to his aggressiveness.. but he is still in fact a kid who needs to be understood.. but it is rather difficult to do so because now he has a brain. Females are no doubt more emotionally mature that men.. maybe because of the "male oppression regime" or something biological.. i don't know.

But I do believe that males and females are totally different in certain aspects.. am not saying one is better or smarter than the other.. but there are differences. Although the differences vanish when you are in love with the opposite sex..maybe because there is a better understanding between the sexes.. I am a romantic person :P and I feel that way.

Humans are scared of anything they dont understand.. so why should gender differences be any different? Our society is still very conservative and the "rules" effectively lead to "mars and venus" concept. Men will always claim their superiority and there'll always be females trying to falsify them.. for once try to understand them and let them understand you.. they are not all that different.
Peace

Indian Stallion said...

I have that book, it totally rocks!

the wannabe indian punkster said...

@ Anon: Thank you! I'm glad to know that those points come in handy for you. And I am astounded at the fact that you haven’t watched TV in 7 years (in a good way, of course)! I can’t stay away from it even though I hate most of it! :O

@ Anon 2 (assuming that you are different from the first anon, if you aren’t, please forgive my lapse in judgment): That is a concept which deserves a post in itself. That’s why I put a 'future post alert' on it. Expect a post on it pretty soon as it is something that has been bothering me for quite some time.

@ Rohini: Thanks! And I totally agree. Saying that men and women are alike is just plain ridiculous. But using the differences between the genders to discriminate is utterly wrong and reprehensible. It seems like a simple enough concept, but you will be surprised as to how many people subscribe to such a constricted worldview. Pah.

@ Pricky: I usually don’t answer wildly incoherent comments as I find it an exercise in futility, but hey I’m bored so here goes,

Ok first fact one: men are more vulnerrable to survive. there are factually more chances of women being born... its to do with the fact that y chromosomes are weaker and find it hard to survive. and anyhow most boys die during and after birth. Also this was very stupidly equalised by killing the girl child by hand... but thats a point for another day...

Right, and your point is? Are you trying to make a point about the fact that men are genetically wired to be more controlling because they were weak at a chromosomal stage? Huh? Where are you going with this, really?

Second, oversimplified notion?
I really need to understand why would you ever go into managing your eruptive anger on a subject like this if you werent being defensive yourself?


Ok, this really needs deciphering. And sentence restructuring. And grammar. But I digress.

third, patriarchy now is spread not because of the psychological adv and physical strength its just so cause its become a norm for the feminists and the pro emancipation groups to consider every man indulginf in it. Its about searching for patriarchal brutality.
Whats to defend? there are stereotypes on both sides. They arent all stereotypes


Ok first of all, look up the meaning of patriarchy. Read up on gender stereotypes and gender roles. Please, for the love of god.

As far as why would you be any different then any other woman would have two consequences
one you are umm a guy in a girls body
two all other women are beneath your superiority
while you make neither claims.


A guy in a girl’s body? You are quite the psychoanalyst aren’t you? Rofl!

Every single statement you have made in your comment is ludicrous. They weren’t just fantastically wrong, they were painfully unintelligible and mostly ignorant. Understand the concepts of patriarchy, gender, stereotypes, gender stereotypes, oppression, social structures and English grammar for crying out loud.

@ Vidya: Exactly. Women and men aren’t diametrically opposite as societal norms would claim. They are indeed a part of an evolving and a continual spectrum as you said. But try telling that to most people and they’ll balk at you like you’ve got the plague. Heh.

@ Drunken Master: Bwahhaha! I do, don’t I! But to my friend’s defense, he is pretty normal for the most part, but boy, does he have his moments. And speaking of cool people (snerk) please scroll up and look at pricky’s cool comment. ;)

the wannabe indian punkster said...

@ Crumbs: With respect to the Nair women example you mentioned, do you think they were considered to have 'abused' their power because they didn't live up to the community's 'expectations' of how they were supposed to have behaved? Its just a thought.

And omfg at the link! It is the best thing I've read all day! I lau it!

@ Szerelem: Biological determinism has been just so harmful over the years, I always find it shocking that people still subscribe to this view.

And yet, they still do. Even educated people who are seemingly rational and normal!

@ La Vida Loca: Hahahah! Now that title I'd love to see! Or does it already exist?

@ TAP: Oh hush you. :D

@ Sudha: That book does not talk about biological superiority obviously, but if you notice, it is based on a rudimentary model of essentialism. I guess thats where my friend was coming from with his lame statement.

@ Whyisthat: Men will always claim their superiority and there'll always be females trying to falsify them.. for once try to understand them and let them understand you..

Who's talking about not understanding men or not wanting to be understood? All I'm saying is that discriminating against women based on biological differences is ridiculous. And quoting biological differences as proof of the superiority of one gender over another is foolhardy as well. Differences exist between the genders, but it doesn't necessarily prove that one gender (male) is superior to another (female). Its as simple as that, really.

@ Indian Stallion: ROFL! Really? :D

anonymouse said...

*Shrug*. Men are superior to women in some tasks, women are superior to men in others, on average.

In a civilised world, those tasks don't usually matter (Anyone regularly hunting for food around here?) and so the differences should be ignored.

The gender specific aspects of cultural evolution lag behind the non-gender specific ones, and so we have discrimination.

For example, consider the recent move in Karnataka to ban women working at night in most industries. All that this would do is make employers not hire women in any job which requires rotating shift work. This would result in discrimination, but officially there would be a law against it.

That this would drive women out of work was not really considered in the attempt to "protect" women from assault (or perhaps it was).

Anurag said...

Pricky: My Y chromosomes work out twice everyday, stay on a balanced diet, abstain from smoking on weekdays, read morally correct books, never masturbate, and drink in moderation, so they can kick any X chromosome's chromosomal-ass. In fact, my X chromosomes are so overwhelmed by my Y chromosomes' strength that they are quietly turning into Y chromosomes themselves, even though it is a practice looked down on in the chromosome world. So there!

I mean, honestly, Y chromosomes are weaker? Sheesh.

Sheesh, also, to the whole gender generalization thingie which has been done to death, reborn, and done to death again. Men are from Mars? Dear Dr. Gray, just speak for yourself, please.

I have decided to be intolerant to everyone for a week. I can't stand assholes till May 31, I have decided. If anybody has a problem with this, stay away from me till 31st.

Man, I write more in the comment space of this blog than in the blog space of my blog. Punkster, can you please write posts about topics I suggest, and then I will add long, witty comments, even though I am composed primarily of weak chromosomes?

Anansi said...

Women cannot dream of sex without love! [:O] Reminds me of this half baked dialogue from a recent hindi movie preview doing the rounds... something to the tune of men put up with marriage for the sex and women tolerate sex for marriage... give me a break! It's just annoying when people think men are the only individuals actively looking for sexual gratification.
Excellent post by the way!

Rimi said...

I once met a Venerable Elder who scornfully dismantled various forms of race theory -- which is biological determinism in yet another avatar -- and proceeded to reflect mellowly on how the academic environment at his home had not 'spoilt' his daughters because of the 'feminine touch' of his wife, and they are all happily married mothers now (the daughters, that is).

Never mind. Why I'm using this space is to tell you to go to this site--> ashwinder.sycophanthex.com and read the Marriage Challenge fics. It's fanfiction, but you'll see how fluidly (erudite, Latin spouting) authors dumped every trapping of strictest patriarchy on the Potterverse. And most of these authors are women.

Sometimes, you gotta wonder. Normativity, the tool of the totalitarian.

Anonymous said...

That article..

"A woman is not as polygamous as a man, except, a nymphomaniac, who constitutes only a small minority. The sexual drive in woman is low compared to a man."

WTF, WTF, WTF.

"Sex in woman is more in her ears" I don't even know what that means!

I need a whole day at my salon to get rid of the toxins that article has generated.

Yo punkster, well-written!

-mockingbird

the wannabe indian punkster said...

@ A'mouse: I wonder if it was the minister's warped perception of reality which led him to believe that he was actually doing this for the 'good' of the women. Either way this move is horrifically detrimental to women making progress in the workplace and it really makes me feel as if we are moving towards a totalitarian state. Call me awfully cynical, but I really do. :(

@ Anurag: Oh weak chromosomes kicking in, eh? Is that why you need to overcompensate, by being an ass until the 31st? Tsk, tsk you poor thing. As an aside, I will post whatever you ask me to if it means that you will leave long comments dripping with sparkling wit. But on one condition. Will you please post more often on your blog? I know your weak chromosomes can handle it! Pretty please? :P

@ Anansi: Hello! Isnt that guy just the gold standard in buffoonery? But what can you expect from a guy who thinks that a woman's sexual core is in her ears (ha ha). And thank you!

@ Rimi: :O:O:O

Hermione makes a decision to marry her Potions master, but she cannot understand beforehand just what she is agreeing to in full

Oh good lord.

At first I hastily surmised that this was a tad harlequin-esque, but this. Dear god, this permeates all standards of campy romantic novel sexism, mediocrity, patriarchal gender roles and barf-worthy physical intimatastic scenes and takes it to terrific heights of crapulence. Thanks Rimi! It is the most hilarious thing I've read all day. Although I have to admit, it is a little disturbing as well.

@ Mockingbird: I know! And do you know that we are only attracted to those men whose immune systems match with ours? And that we have the gift of 'decoding' the male immune system in 3 seconds (how did he come up with this number) flat! Rofl!

And gosh, thanks!

Jay Sun said...

Thank for the link in your very important update...now i understand why he shuttles between Mumbai, New Delhi and Cochin !!! :)

anonymouse said...

You live in a totalitarian state. I live in one which is going there. You are less cynical than I am. But then, you are also younger than I am. The optimism of youth.

I am not sure that we could create a state based on the principles of liberty and equality which ould work well enough to continue for a few thousand years.

Democracy doesn't scale. Nor do groups scale well past about 150 people. Also see Dunbar's number. Convinience is so much cheaper than liberty.

On that idiotic article, I wonder if he meant that a woman's sexual core is *between* her ears? In that case, it would be true too.

Anurag said...

Punkster, me an ass? Whatever gave the impression? :)

Sure, I'll try to post something on my blog. I want to be regular too but just can't seem to think of anything worthwhile.

the wannabe indian punkster said...

@ Jay Sun: I know! His 'truths' about gender, science etc. must be in high demand, yeah?

@ A'mouse: Even with a community size of 150, they must be held together with lucrative incentives no?

Anyway, I gave up trying to make sense of what that man was spouting in his idiotic article. But if he was really going for the noodle in our heads, then I'll be damned. :D

@ Anurag: Oh well since a certain someone practically announced that fact in this comment space, I thought I was justified in calling you an ass. :P

And *prod*, go post. Oh and before you post, please read my 'very important update'. Hee.

nevermind said...

Never had much use for essentialism; I can understand it's simplistic/practical appeal in the strategic subaltern sense, but have always wondered whether this just papers over faultlines which will inevitably reappear (e.g. Fatah/Hamas?), especially now that we live in less simple times. As for Biological Determinism, I think most life scientists would agree that it's been replaced by Multifactorialism.

But I've been fascinated by the historic rescue acts actioned by the essentialists/ pre-essentialists. Has it ever struck you that Virgil wrote the entirely fabricated Aeneid with the Dido as cunning temptress angle at a time when the late Republic (the acme of patriarchy; any clever woman was labelled a whore) had been coolly and effectively reduced to impotence by Cleopatra? And then, the mythmakers converted Cleopatra (possibly using Virgil's Dido as template) into a 'beautiful temptress' when she was neither beautiful nor a temptress. She just wore the pants in the whole of the Mediterranean, that's all. But, that was just too inconvenient, hey? A woman wear pants?

Anonymouse said...

Lets go set up a new country somewhere sane?

Anonymouse said...

Lets go set up a new country somewhere sane?

pRicky said...

So well written is all that you can actually respond to without contempt?
TCH! TCH!
IF your understanding of basic points which came out straight after read your spout is impossible then dear girl you need to read up.
and I wasnt delving into any of the theories you obnoxiously profess to know because that would have been inconsequential.
If you would have taken a moment of your very jobless routine and read what was written you would have realized how defensive rant you had launched into.
But anyhow I had figured my comment would miff you. It wasnt with an intention to ruffle your wings or offend you. Purely to state that you were being quite stereotypical yourself.
And to quote you "For crying out a loud" When you dont understand some things dont bang your head with assumptions because as I notice they dont let you understand what was said...

ranvir said...

i think tht u belive that men r root of all troubles. wht do you knw bout science neways? there r scentists studying and proving tht men r smrter than woman becos thy r experts. they know what they r doing. men r more rational,smart etc cos they use right side of brain. nd women r soft n more caring etc etc becos they use left side of brain. wht is wrong with being soft nd caring? dont u want to be mother? isnt being caring the best thing a mother can do fer her child? why do u want to be a man so much? try to be a woman ok and dnt spoil other women pls.

Anonymous said...

also knw wht ur sayin before u say it nd learn ur place, pls.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
silbil said...

awwww ranvir and anon ....i read three posts of this immoral girl punkstar and i was feeling so dishearteded that no 'asli ma ka doodh piya hua mard' is not coming to teach her place ...
and Bhagwaanji (who i am sure is a MAN too) listened to my 'abla prayer' and here you come...
but see people, i am not selfish that way, all of you can share this troll with me...

Punkstar, i was laughing so much at cnnibn blog that you linked to that i forgot to comment here but ranvir brought out the nymphomaniac woman in me and i had to say something...

not that i write in my own blog that often but i am also going to link to that GEM and then ponder over my favourite parts, trust me , there are plenty...
it will keep my seducing mind, just waiting to jump on men , just before i have my period, also in check...

sigh...all i need a man like him or ranvir to show me the correct path...
do you think 16 mondays of fasting will help...come on you'd know...you can ask that 'bilogically superior' friend also...

rebel said...

Ok I read that IBN dude's article! And I have to comment now !

The Supreme Court in banning ogling, touching, sexually coloured remarks, etc., has completely ignored the biology. It is like expecting a lion not to taste meat. The biology of man requires him to take the initiative in a sexual relation with a woman.

WTF... What does he even think? That touching is totally acceptable at workplace.. So, basically if a guy walks up to me in my cubicle and asks me if I am free tonight for a some really hot action, we should just let go of it, because it is a man's biology?

So, all this guy says from his annoyingly huge article replete with facts is that men have not eveolved from the animals. They remain beasts!

Honestly I have never read anything this chauvinistic, idiotic and outright crazy!

When are people going to cut the 'gender stereotype' crap!

nomad said...

hehe, funny and interesting. on a side note, try doing this the next time you are on a flight with a female pilot (there are many on indian airlines). just try and look at the faces of men around you the moment they here a lady 'captain' speaking. trust me it's great entertainment :D

Drunken Master said...

Yeah Punk, wouldnt u like to be Mother? Talking like this about men will never get you one, men. While man use right side of brain, woman use wrong side, but it isnt womans fault, after all, God created all of us, and HE didn't create all of us equal.

Scientist are expert dats why dey conduct studies on how and why men are smarter because scientist know what dey are doing. Especially those dat support creationism, because after all, God created all of us (not equal).

Dont try to be man, just sit at home, cook food, wash dishes, care for child and allow husband to do sex to you, after all, isnt that what woman are on earth for in first place? How can woman be soft and caring if you force man to beat you?

Oh and again, dont spoil other woman for me plis.

anonymouse said...

Oh god, idiots again?

http://www.rense.com/general2/rb.htm

Oh, and Ranvir, whether men in general are smarter than women (or not) is a matter for study, but you personally are a waste of schooling.

Why are you afraid that Megha will "spoil" other women?

The anonymous of May 27, 2007 6:09 PM:
This is Megha's blog and she has the right to say anything she likes here. It is her place, after all.

Chimera said...

education has nothing to do with these gender generalizations, i remember in my first work place, the management (MNC multi-million $$ company!) never used to send women on trips abroad (for gawd knows what reasons...) thankfully that has changed.

Happy Kitten said...

The anger can be felt..

Yea it is normal to react thus when they assert that men are superior to women.

I do think that Women differs from Men in many ways and from the childhood one can see the diffrence. while bringing up our daughter and son, I found a lot of difference. I m not sure if it can be termed generalm but girls learn faster and try to be independant earlier while the opposite happens with the boys.

Anyway u write well..

Drunken Master said...

In reference to that absurdly bloated post by Anonymous dated May 27, 2007, 7:04pm.

I was born in Austria and I dated a girl who has Jewish blood. What does that make me? I wonder how I'm supposed to react to that drivel?

the wannabe indian punkster said...

@ Nevermind: I know! Cleopatra was a fantastic politician and immensely clever and she commanded the respect of her people, but oh no no we cant have that can we? A woman being a fantastic politician? Blasphemy. She *must* have slept her way through. Even if she didnt, itll be a good idea to defame her and make her look like a temptress. After all clever women are boring and less attractive than temptresses. See?

@ A'mouse: Lets!

@ Pricky: IF your understanding of basic points which came out straight after read your spout is impossible then dear girl you need to read up.

Say what now? Why do you pompously use big words and string them along with no meaning to them whatsoever? Rofl!

@ Ranvir and the next anon(who I assume is Ranvir): Yes, yes. I am a bad woman who wants to be a man and I want to grow outer sex organs. That is why I am not soft and I will not be a good mother because I will be too busy trying to be a man and I'll let my kids go to the dogs while I am trying to reject my soft and caring parts and be rough and tough like a man. You are absolutely correct.

But all the women here come here by themselves so I think they want to be men too.

Kindly give them your excellent advice please, and don’t let them be spoilt by me.

@ Silbil: I am happy than Ravir the macho man is here to put us in our place, Silbil! Otherwise I dont know what horrible things I would have unleashed on the hapless womenfolk who visit here. Poor things, I spoil them with my 'manly' attributes and Ranvir just wants me to ease up on them. Dont you understand?

@ Rebel: Then surely you must have not missed the gems about how "women can decode the immune system of a man in 3 seconds" or the "sexuality of a woman lies in her ears" and other such biological and evolutionary pearls of wisdom. That article is the funniest thing I've read all week actually.

@ Nomad: Hello! Ha ha I bet you they must have an "I can’t believe a woman is flying this thing" or an "I hope I'm safe because you know, women can’t handle cars let alone planes" kinda expressions plastered on their faces. Ohhh, the joy. How I wish I could be there to see their reactions. :)

@ Drunken master: I know! That’s why I want to be a man so I can force myself to use both the right side and the left side of my brain. Chee chee, I am such a bad woman; I need Ranvir to show me the correct way to behave. Say DM, why don’t you join Ranvir and spread his truth? I'm sure he wouldn’t mind! :P

@ A'mouse: I think the anonymous after Ranvir is Ranvir himself. But don’t bother trying to make sense to such idiots, he'll probably turn around and try to help you as you’ve obviously been spoilt by my dastardly influence.

lol.

@ Chimera: Hello hello! Really? Women were never sent abroad? How completely baffling! But at least, that has changed now, so phew.

@ Happy kitten: Hello and thank you! I do agree that differences obviously exist, but discriminating against a whole gender based on innate differences is just plain buffoonery, me thinks.

the wannabe indian punkster said...

@ DM: You actually read the whole thing? I am astounded.

*bows*

anonymouse said...

You assume that I am of the gender being spoilt by your influence?

the wannabe indian punkster said...

@ A'mouse: I didnt mean it that way in my answer to your comment. It was just a general 'I spoil everyone who comments here' type statement. At least in my reply to you. I guess I could have been more clear, huh? :)

anonymouse said...

Oh, and here I thought I was being suitably gender neutral. Hmmm, if you spoil commenters, I am willing to get spolit rotten!

That Armchair Philosopher said...

bwahahahahaha. hil-arious second article on ibn.

You might like to see the last part of http://www.doubleviking.com/manly-stuff-that-is-no-longer-manly-5580-p.html


"Whether you like it or not, gone are the days of roses, hastily scrawled love poems, and sweet serenades crooned lovingly outside a fair maiden’s window. Today, women may pretend like they want to be courted by a chivalrous gentleman, but in reality the chivalrous man has about as much chance of netting the girl of his dreams as Helen Keller has of winning a darts competition."

For more juicy bait, check it out :)


and wtf. who the heck wrote their blog post in the comments section? anon - go get a blog already.

crumbs said...

Punkster, gathering from your reply, u seem to have "learnt your place" rather well ;0
hey bout the my previous example, as I said, I can't remember the specific details here, but when I said abused, I meant that they pretty much accpeted their power to be absolute. The point was, there if women were given power, then the way they were "expected" to behave would be radically different, right?no one expects men to be demure today, so when woman were in power back then, I doubt they would be expected to behave like the women who would NOT do stuff to "spoil other women" for the wonders like DM ;D
another example could be spartan women-this along could blast the whole biologically superior theory-here's a society that valued physical strength more than any other in the world, one that belived "in doing what was right" for the heck of doing it. here women, while they never fought on battle fields,where trained, both physically and intellectually.they may not hold offices, but everyone openly acknowledged the woman's influence in decision making.they inherited property along with men(women apparently held 40 % of the property in Sparta), could keep, and in fact where encouraged to keep lovers, and there was no case of "stay indoors, pine away for your husband who's at war, and pray for his victory, or weep for his death" deal.


ps: about that very short and succintly put commnet by anon of May 27, 2007 7:04 PM, can someone phuleease do me a favour and tell me what the hell that is all about??it must be by biologically inferior brain, but I really cannot read for more that 5 lines of what promises to be great entertainment. I dont wanna miss out :(

Asal Tamil Penn said...

@ Ellorum Morons: Don’t mess with namma ooru penn.

@ Tamilpunkster: You do us Tamizh Penns proud.

mumbaigirl said...

The comments you attract. The mind boggles. They help us see what a lon, LONG way we still have to go.

the wannabe indian punkster said...

@ A'mouse: You sure you can handle the pain and the emotional scarring? ;)

@ TAP: Youve resurfaced! And you actually read that anon's comment? I didnt even bother reading beyond the first line.

@ Crumbs: That was what I was wondering. Surely when they were given power, they were expected to act a certain way and when they didnt, they were accused of 'letting the power go to their head', if you know what I mean. And I also heard that Spartan women were much more powerful than their Athenian counterparts, yeah?

@ Asal Tamil Penn: Thank you so much for having me'back. And I hope I deserve such praise. :)

@ Mumbaigirl: But, of course. The freakish comments I get usually represent most of the problems I cover in my posts. Sigh.

Primalsoup said...

Heh, I have been coming back to this post a few times to read all the comments! :D Why, why, why?!!

And I agree with ATP, you do us Tamizh Penns proud! :)

Primalsoup said...

And delete the Mother Teresa issue comment pa! The eyes hurt as one scrolls down.

rebel said...

Oh man, you must be amazingly proud of yourself right! All the comments on your blog.. One day we could make a book out of these..

First thing at work everyday -- Read every new comment that comes up on Megha's blog!

And one more vote for the tamil penn pride thingy! :)

shark said...

he..he.. these books I must say are just written to mint money.

Now who wouldn't want to read about men vs women, it's fun and interesting.. so whatever crap you throw into it, people will read!

I think all these books make us do too much of analysis.. I guess we are just better off with our lives without reading these books. :)

Women can never completely understand men not can men understand women so there you go :)

P.S: By the way, the book "Why men don't listen and women can't read maps" makes a much more interesting (read funny) read.

anonymouse said...

Yes. Intelligent people spoiling me will be a welcome change. I promise to reciprocate too.

Anurag said...

Who is Helen Keller and why is it being assumed that she can't win a darts competition?

Unmana said...

Bravo. I agree with every word you say. We need to speak out more to counter all those sexist idiots.

the wannabe indian punkster said...

@ Primal: Delete panniyachu and edhuku ma ivalov praise? Illatha vekkatha vara vechutiyae! :P

@ Rebel: I know! Orey the tamil penn pride here wonlies!

@ Shark: Especially with the Men are from Mars etc craphola, it is utter BS marketed as 'relationship advice'.

It makes me seethe, actually.

@ A'mouse: Yay, I'll be the spoilee for once!

@ Anurag: Are you referring to the creative essay written by the 'I don’t have a life' anon? I deleted it. It started to hurt my eyes. :-D

@ Unmana: Hello! And gosh, thanks! We certainly do!

anonymouse said...

*Passes coffee to the punkster*

I was going to write about Helen Keller, but then I figured that Wikipedia would probably be easier: Helen Keller

anonymouse said...

Hands the punkster a cup of fresh Turkish.

The Stig said...

This Mathews fella is a proper looney, ain't he? He starts of with religion and then brilliantly and abruptly throws in science and evolution. Clearly the fella has missed the memo on evolution and religion. And yeah, i couldn't read that drivel after two paragraphs. Can you blame me?

Pixie said...

I didn't like that dumb book either though my cousin thinks the world of it!
As for the article, I couldn't read it completely because I am alternating between amusement and irritation! (Grammar mistake? ;-))
I am speechless that such an article was published and the guy must be a prized idiot!!!
I really don't know what to say for such wankers/gits who write such articles.... I'm thinking of doing a post on it too...

the mad momma said...

oh why do i always come in too late?! i apologise for not adding anything of value to this post Megha! ... i am too busy laughing my ass off... do you think pricky and ranvir are for real?!

Sue said...

I can definitely have sex without thinking of love and no, those guys didn't complain, nor did they think I was a whore. I guess I was lucky. :)

the wannabe indian punkster said...

@ A'mouse: *grabs the Turkish and chugs it down*

Thanks, that was necessary.

@ The stig: Well obviously, I'll blame you! That guy is an authority on evolutionary behavior and all you can do is pooh pooh his findings. Shame on you.

@ Pixie: My first reaction to the article was just, plain, shock. Such utter moronism cannot go unnoticed, ya know. :D

@ The Mad Momma: Hello! And they seem to be! Aren't they brilliant? What do we weak women know anyway? Heh.

@ Sue: Oh you're a freak of nature, just like I am! Whee!