.define what "a real woman" is right here.

[SmartAlx]

I was reading the "define man" thread and it occurred to me that many of the things everyone (except for me ) was listing there were things that the modern woman aspires to be as well. For example, being able to pick yourself up when life knocks you down. Even knowing this, people still chose to associate these characteristics of strength with male-ness, instead of human-ness.

I find it absolutely fascinating that even in our progressive world, enlightened men and women still associate maleness with strength, and don't realize that by defining men this way, they are at the same time defining women to be something OTHER THAN this¹. And this is done all the while knowing that women today like to show just how strong they are. I mean really, being a "strong woman" today is something to aspire to, isn't it?

Okay, this might be totally off the mark and I'm willing to completely abandon the idea so let's not argue about what I just said. I just brought it up because the realization raised the interesting point that women want to be this way today, but Men HAVE to be this way, and it made me wonder what you think the differences of being a Man/Woman are.

So, here is the question. Whether or not if women do or do not share the characteristics listed in the being a man thread, what characteristics define being a woman? You are encouraged to include characteristics that are common to both sexes, but please list them as such, if you will, so we can be clear about what makes someone a man, a woman, and a just a mature human being.

¹ When you ask someone to "define something," you are also asking them to "differentiate something." You basically want to narrow down the definition from something broad to something specific. So if most of your definition of "A Man" includes the characteristics of "A Woman," then maybe your definition is too broad. Maybe you are defining "A Human."

[Marco Polo]

Being able to pick herself up. Oh, and being able to pick a bouquet of flowers and make me a sandwich for lunch. Pleeeease... (lots of cheese OK, don't be shy now)

[Brutha]

When you ask someone to "define something," you are also asking them to "differentiate something." You basically want to narrow down the definition from something broad to something specific. So if most of your definition of "A Man" includes the characteristics of "A Woman," then maybe your definition is too broad. Maybe you are defining "A Human."

If someone asks the question what shall I do as a man, what a woman should do is not important for the discussion.

[Bitsy]

Originally Posted by SmartAlx

I find it absolutely fascinating that even in our progressive world, enlightened men and women still associate maleness with strength, and don't realize that by defining men this way, they are at the same time defining women to be something OTHER THAN this¹. And this is done all the while knowing that women today like to show just how strong they are. I mean really, being a "strong woman" today is something to aspire to, isn't it?

All my life I have had a problem with the conventional concept of "strong". I don't know what your or others' definition of "strong" is. All my adult life, I guess because I am more sensitive and empathetic to the feelings of others and also more sensitive regarding my own feelings, and maybe I cry first when the world comes crashing down around me, and after the panic and the cry, I pick up the pieces and come upon what to do next (and other people are only around for the "weak" crying part, if they are around at all), people have habitually called me "weak." Or they are incessantly telling me to be "strong," men can't stand it when I cry in front of them and without fail, whoever he is, he tells me to stop crying and "be strong." I just want to clobber him for it [let me cry you idiot!]! Yet I know bloody well most average people would have never had the courage to do half of the things I have done in living my life that often result in situations where I might cry. And I know they don't live with the intensity of emotions, mine and others', that I live with and that requires that I also treat others very well, or I will hurt them, and then hurt myself in doing so. Surely you don't need to be strong if you have little to nothing testing your emotional strength, and that depends in part on how much you can actually feel.

I used to think of my personal strength as a weeping willow tree. Yes, I bend and sway with every breeze of wind that blows, and I almost come totally unhinged in a storm, but I never break. And I have thought of other people, for example certain males (and females) I know, who are like oak trees [insensitive in one or more ways]; no matter how hard the wind blows, they stand against it, they remain immovable and untouched, but if a hard enough wind blows, their branches will break. Which one of these is stronger and why is only the weeping willow deemed weak?

I think that no matter what characteristic you attribute to one sex or the other, someone is going to take offence, because in my opinion, in this day and age, people have strayed so far from their natural state, in general, to say nothing of their personal individuality, that male and female characteristics are contrived now in either gender, or feigned to the point of self-deception, to prove one thing or another or to be accepted by someone else or some group, or as a necessary step on the road of their personal development. That means, as we are seeing, that the gender characteristics may no longer have the validity they used to, and we may never know the true nature that lies beneath the feigned characteristics that have been espoused by a certain individual--we may never know that person's true self or nature, due to some kind of inner reaction s/he has to external conditions.

However, supposing that all people were in and embraced their natural state, concerning males and females and strength, however you define it, from my observations, men are by nature "strong" on the outside and "weak" or "soft" on the inside, while women are by nature strong on the inside and "weak" or "soft" on the outside. I perceive the latter about myself and men go to great pains to project the former, that can be seen everywhere. As a result, a girl will get pegged as "weak," like I have been. I have been frequently scorned by other females because of that perceived weakness and I guess they think I give "women" a bad name by propogating the thing they perceive as a myth, so they get angry at me for being me, even though they might come off as great cowards if we got into a discussion about what they've done and what I've done in life, or, by the same token, they would change their bad assessment of me as being weak.


So what's the connection between courage and strength? Is there one?

I aspire to be a lot of things, but one of them is not and will never be "a strong woman". I am what I am.

Due to what I wrote above, I won't waste my time making up a list of attributes that define being a woman, since when you deny all the differences, both are perceived as the same and there is nothing left to define .

[PianoManGidley]

I think Bitsy hits on an essential issue, in that there are many different forms of strength, and that one can be "strong" in different ways, be it physical, emotional, intellectual, spiritual, or some other, more specific attribute. Are any one of these manifestations of strength more desirable in one gender than another? Aren't gender roles defined differently between societies, and even debated upon within each society?

[SmartAlx]

Originally Posted by Bitsy

All my life I have had a problem with the conventional concept of "strong". I don't know what your or others' definition of "strong" is. All my adult life, I guess because I am more sensitive and empathetic to the feelings of others and also more sensitive regarding my own feelings, and maybe I cry first when the world comes crashing down around me, and after the panic and the cry, I pick up the pieces and come upon what to do next (and other people are only around for the "weak" crying part, if they are around at all), people have habitually called me "weak." (whew! That was a looong sentence.)

I think it's great that you are the way you are. Women with your softness awakens the hero/nurturer in me. I want to help or make you feel better, or at least provide a listening ear.

However, supposing that all people were in and embraced their natural state, concerning males and females and strength, however you define it, from my observations, men are by nature "strong" on the outside and "weak" or "soft" on the inside, while women are by nature strong on the inside and "weak" or "soft" on the outside.

That is a good point. I like that. There is a lot of truth in that statement, but if men are able to pick themselves back up, then they have to be pretty strong inside, right?

Due to what I wrote above, I won't waste my time making up a list of attributes that define being a woman, since when you deny all the differences, both are perceived as the same and there is nothing left to define .

I asked...

You are encouraged to include characteristics that are common to both sexes, but please list them as such

so feel free to list them. Also surely there are some characteristics that women have that men don't. Please don't tell me that someone who embraces her femininity so much as you won't admit to having these difference. As a superficial example... I know that women like to improve the environment in which they spend their time. They decorate. Men like to improve their environmnent by building things. Generally speaking of course.

[ivorytickler]

Hmmm? Interesting question.

I'd say that women are nurturing and nest but then I'd get told by someone who has no desire to do either that it's not true of all women.

I don't think there are characteristics that are true of all women. I think there are tendencies but I think they're mostly taught by society. I think we do have a stronger desire to have children than men (whereas I think men are motivated by sex we're motivated to bond and mate) but, of course, there are the CBC women out there who have no desire to have kids.

I give up.

[Bitsy]

Originally Posted by SmartAlx

That is a good point. I like that. There is a lot of truth in that statement, but if men are able to pick themselves back up, then they have to be pretty strong inside, right?

Well...maybe the result of being strong on the outside is that you don't get knocked down as much or as easily in the first place.

Originally Posted by SmartAlx

I asked...so feel free to list them.

Actually, not only do I not feel free to list them, I'm hesitant to discuss anything, because in my natural speech or writing, there are plenty of females on this website who would immediately pick up on something "sexist" and jump on it and try to engage me in some kind of argument or debate and I am really trying to avoid their attention .

Originally Posted by SmartAlx

Also surely there are some characteristics that women have that men don't. Please don't tell me that someone who embraces her femininity so much as you won't admit to having these difference.

I do admit them and I like them and I'm proud of them, but I try to avoid discussing them to avoid having feminists jump down my throat. If you don't specifically acknowledge that you are not talking about all women, you get attacked . It's not worth talking, for how meticulous you have to be with semantics these days to avoid this kind of attention, which I do want to avoid. I actually don't think about the differences too much anymore or try to articulate them, because verbal articulation will just get me in trouble, and whether or not I articulate them, I can live them in myself and let all of the uptight people argue about who has what characteristics to what extent.

Originally Posted by SmartAlx

As a superficial example... I know that women like to improve the environment in which they spend their time. They decorate. Men like to improve their environmnent by building things. Generally speaking of course.

Well, I like to have a comfy home environment...and the things that men build have to be decorated, otherwise it's just a hard, cold empty space . [yes, of course, the obligatory "generally speaking"]. For me, the decorating and fixing up of the home is completely about creating a safe emotional environment, it's related to my emotions and sensitivity to how my surroundings make me feel. And I'm speaking strictly for myself!

Maybe I have found a way to get off the feminist hook--I won't talk about "women," just about myself. That will sound awfully selfish, but...I don't get most other women to be honest, so how can I speak for them?

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Bitsy, I personally promise not to attack you as sexist. I don't know if you were referring to me considering how many "debates" I've gotten into with men here about sexism, etc. But regardless, I think it's horrible that you would feel like you have to hide your true feelings for fear of attack. I may not agree with you (maybe I would) but I would really like to hear your opinion. As much as I decry the notion that men and women are biologically so different, I don't have a problem with their being so as long as no one expects or attempts to compel me to act a certain way based on my gender.

What do you think?

[Bitsy]

Originally Posted by {aspiring_to_clarity}

Bitsy, I personally promise not to attack you as sexist. I don't know if you were referring to me considering how many "debates" I've gotten into with men here about sexism, etc. But regardless, I think it's horrible that you would feel like you have to hide your true feelings for fear of attack. I may not agree with you (maybe I would) but I would really like to hear your opinion. As much as I decry the notion that men and women are biologically so different, I don't have a problem with their being so as long as no one expects or attempts to compel me to act a certain way based on my gender.

What do you think?

Well, it was mostly reading along in Steve's "how to be a man" blog thread and a few girls persistently and vehemently attacking some men, mostly after I stopped posting in it...and recently in another thread about the guy who didn't add the word "some" in his thread title when asking if "women" test men. IMO, a plural noun like that doesn't mean "all" women, and grammatically speaking, it doesn't mean all women either, it's left ambiguous (however, he was "guilty" of the "crime" of more clear generalization (not that I care about that either) when I read towards the bottom of his first post, but when something as trivial as the use of an unqualified plural noun could elicit such vehement and unkind responses, I'd rather just sit it out!)

So, I think it's best if I just speak for myself. If I had any list, which I don't, or if I had any hypothesis about it, I would go against my better judgment and say it, but I honestly don't. I just have some amorphous intuitions about the possible inherent differences and there is no organization to them either.

The bottom line is I just don't understand enough about what I observe in men and women to come up with a list that I would really believe in. I respond to these topics, I think because I have lingering anger that I have had to repress my femininity (or perceived femininity) to avoid getting hurt by what I would call very feminist girls, which almost makes up the majority of females these days it seems. I resented that they turned full-circle and started trying to squash down what is considered feminine, to scorn me and perceive me as weak because I am this feminine way and I wanted to be that way too.

As I think about it, I believe there is perhaps one or two key foundational elements that are different about men and women, and the differences perceived in our everyday life are just mere reflections of that foundational difference. I don't know what that element is and I doubt I'd believe anyone here who told me they knew what it was, but this (while I just said I had no hypothesis ) hypothesis would allow for many different degree variations of the gender differences we perceive in our daily lives.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Bitsy

I think because I have lingering anger that I have had to repress my femininity (or perceived femininity) to avoid getting hurt by what I would call very feminist girls, which almost makes up the majority of females these days it seems. I resented that they turned full-circle and started trying to squash down what is considered feminine, to scorn me and perceive me as weak because I am this feminine way and I wanted to be that way too.

I'm really sorry you've felt that way. I feel a little angry when I hear men or women saying "men are this way, women are this way" or "men should be like this and women like that." And I fight against it. I hope I haven't offended you in the process. In addition, I feel pretty marginalized by some of the men here in the same way you feel so by women (or more specifically feminists). The problem is that there are so many double standards in place (and it affects both men and women). I'm meant to be a sex goddess, gorgeous, but not so emotional (psycho), submit to a man (because that's what I really want) but not expect him to take care of me -- I have to work for myself. There are opposing standards on both sides so that at some point eveyone will feel like they are "doing it wrong." That is why I have such a problem with trying to define gender roles -- we are all individuals and somebody is going to get left out and feel crappy as a result. I hope I've made my point in here somewhere .

The fact is, I've never been really "feminine" when it comes to a lot of things -- I don't wear make-up, I don't really get off on shopping or things like that, I couldn't handle watching soap operas if my life depended on it. I've mostly been a tomboy who played football in the street with the boys and have the scars to prove it. I loved watching my dad work on the car and I have no qualms about camping out in the middle of nowhere without modern conveniences. I am quite analytical sometimes. I am fiercly independent, no shrinking violet. But I am also very emotional and empathetic, I love kids and want lots of them, I love keeping a home that is nice and calm and doing things for my boyfriend that show him I care. Hell yeah I wash his laundry. And he -- one of the most macho guys of my acquaintance -- cooks delicious dinners for me every night.

The problem is I hate it when people try to tell me I am or should be a certain way because I am a woman. I don't fit into the traditional mold of "femininity." Just like you don't feel you fit into the mold that so many feminists have battered you with. We are all not living up to some arbitrary standard another person has set up.

True feminism is at it's core about equal rights for women. A lot of people have taken it too far in my opinion. But that is the basis. I don't think it advances the cause of feminism to hate on other women. So, I just wanted to tell you that I don't think you should be anything other than what you are. And if anyone tells you differently, just send them over and I'll knock them out with my "masculine" side.

[JimOfferman]

I tend to think of "real" women as being "real" men with breasts!

More seriously, I find that I'm drawn to people because of the qualities they possess, not because of their sex. It's about who is a "real" person or not. For me, a "real" people are those who are very conscious about the life they live.

[SmartAlx]

Prepare for a non-PC post.

Originally Posted by Bitsy

Well, it was mostly reading along in Steve's "how to be a man" blog thread and a few girls persistently and vehemently attacking some men... ...I'd rather just sit it out!)

Thank you for your contributions Bitsy. I think you have answered my next question:
Why is it that you people will eagerly define a man, but you won't define a woman? And if you do choose to define a woman you include all kinds of caveats. What are you afraid of?? You are basically anonymous here. What makes men so "special" or more accurately unspecial that you'll define us??? You all sound so sexist.

I guess you Bitsy answered the question. "It's just not worth it." Well, I propose that it IS worth it. Overzealous feminism has unwittingly taken us down a road towards a world*** filled with confused emasculated men who have to ask questions like "what is a man?" "Strong" men are afraid of women these days. What the??? I was raised (as a child) to think that my wife WOULD work and we would be a two income family. So it allowed me to take it easy. Now I pretty much HAVE to marry a woman who will work, and the women that I find attractive want to stay home and take care of the family and I would like to support a woman like that. But it will be difficult.* I was still ambitious, but for personal reasons, not for providing for a family. Providing for a family has driven men for thousands of years. But feminism has enabled** that urge and desire to disappear.

I'm so sick and tired of women who want equality don't want the hardships that go along with the equality! You want to be equal? Fine, good. Be equal... you've defined men so easily, now freaking define women. Why is THAT so hard??

You know why? You can't, because you can't define yourself without threatening the powers that you've been stealing over the past 40 years. You fear the truth. You don't want to admit that the world NEEDS you to be soft and tender and needy and to stay at home with the kids. You don't want to be a man, but you don't want to be perceived as weak either. And at the same time, you don't appreciate a man who is strong and hard, because you want him to believe that you are just as hard and strong as he is. If it's so important to you that he is strong mentally, emotionally, logically, spiritually, and physically, then why do you devalue his strength by saying that you are just as strong as he is?? Huh??? Stop emasculating us!

Oh, you won't feel one bit bad about using your feminine wiles to get a man to change your tire for you, or do some other task that you don't enjoy. That is, unless you are too proud to admit that you need a man. Then you will be "tough" and use your cellphone to call a tow truck driver (a man probably) or AAA to change it for you. And you'll spend valuable money just because you didn't want to rely on a man. Oh yeah, it's YOUR money, but it's OUR overpriced tow-truck driver system. Without you, costs to tow wouldn't be so high. Oh, you would change your tire yourself? That's good. Everybody should know how to do that. But surely there is some task that you know of that the man in your life will do that you won't. He'll patch the roof himself. He'll give the car a tune-up. He'll get rid of the dead mouse. If you find yourself stranded in the wilderness, he'll kill a wild animal bear handed if he has to in order to feed you. Yes, there are probably some things that you'll do that he won't. Maybe you'll kill a spider that he flees from. But there is something innately masculine about coming to the rescue, and you know it.

You want a man's advantages and you want men to overcome your disadvantages for you, like protect you in a life and death situation. You want to be the leader, but you don't want to take responsibility for being the leader. You'll disagree with me, but you have shown time and again that you don't understand what responsibility is. Sure, you want people to follow you, but will you go down with the ship? Seriously. THAT is responsibility. The willingness to take... uh... responsibility for your subordinates' mistakes, even to the point of death. Of course you wouldn't go down with the ship. You probably think it's stupid. And besides, you are the child-bearer. You shouldn't have to, right? Oh, you might throw yourself in front of a car to save your own child, but would you push your husband out of the way? Why not? You are the leader right? You sure act like it. If you are equal, then you should be just as willing to sacrifice your life for the life of your husband as he is willing to sacrifice his life for yours. And you can bet that he wouldn't blink twice before he died saving you. No man would. There's an easy definition of a man, right there. But women wouldn't be so quick to risk their lives for their husbands. Why not? The children? Oh, you have just proven yourself essential to the children's development. Why don't you take responsibility then and RAISE your children instead of letting complete strangers (child-care) do it for you??? You want real equality? Then stop taking it from us!

With leadership comes sacrifice. And sometimes sacrifice means that you need to stay at home with the kids instead of having a career because it's better for your kids. You understand that it's better for the WORLD that your children get raised properly than you being a lawyer, a doctor, or a CEO.

Oh, you don't want kids? Why? You don't want kids to get in the way of YOUR happiness. Well, at least YOU are honest with yourself. You at least recognize that you don't want anyone to be more important to you than you. You at least recognize your selfishness. You might not call it that, but deep inside you know that your desires are all about #1. I mean, you won't even put your husband over yourself.

There was a show on the History Channel or National Geographic or something that discussed what people would do if they knew that the world was going to be destroyed. I think the situation in question was a black hole coming our way... MUUUCH worse for the Earth than an asteroid. It would wreak havoc on the entire solar system, and probably destroy all life on Earth, if it didn't eat the Earth completely. Yet, the time between discovery and doom would be years. They interviewed people about what they would do with their last couple of years or few months. And would you believe it that more than one woman actually said that she would like to know the experience of having a child???? I mean seriously if that doesn't exhibit the selfishness in today's new and improved woman I don't know what does.

You don't want to admit that you are closer to the traditional stereotype because you are afraid that it will get in the way of your "equality". And you won't admit that you actually want superiority. You're right. We aren't equal. You are in charge now. Now I want equality! Where's MY equality!?

I was hoping this forum would be a place where actual intelligent people could reasonably discuss questions like this with open minds. The lackluster response to my query has shown me just how wrong I was.
You guys are too closed minded to have a reasonable discussion about controversial topics that challenge your status quo. You just want to be in the choir.

As I think about it, I believe there is perhaps one or two key foundational elements that are different about men and women, and the differences perceived in our everyday life are just mere reflections of that foundational difference. I don't know what that element is and I doubt I'd believe anyone here who told me they knew what it was, but this (while I just said I had no hypothesis ) hypothesis would allow for many different degree variations of the gender differences we perceive in our daily lives.

I believe you can find these differences between the genders in these books:
Wild at Heart
and
Captivating

These two books show how even the small differences between the genders can have a huge impact on our lives.

I'm sure many will disagree (maybe even you) but I believe that men measure their self-worth (mostly) on their achievements and women measure their success/self-worth (mostly) on the quality and quantity of their personal relationships.


*And please don't get into that religion of personal responsibility here. I was a child. I was taught very early that my wife would work and the world at large (including discussion groups like this) did nothing to teach me that, just in case, I should prepare for being the sole provider.

**Enabling is a very important part of responsibility. If you wave someone across a busy street, you enable them to cross. And guess what, if they get hit, you are legally responsible.

***Women value security over freedom more than men do. No man will give up his right to own a firearm for the idea that he will somehow be safer without it. It's a completely ridiculous notion. We are losing more and more of our God-given constitutional rights in the name of "security". Who would give up rights for security? Not men.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Wow.

[Angela]

SmartAlx. What are you hoping to accomplish here?

[Bitsy]

ummm....ok...

Originally Posted by SmartAlx

Oh, you won't feel one bit bad about using your feminine wiles to get a man to change your tire for you, or do some other task that you don't enjoy. That is, unless you are too proud to admit that you need a man. Then you will be "tough" and use your cellphone to call a tow truck driver (a man probably) or AAA to change it for you. And you'll spend valuable money just because you didn't want to rely on a man. Oh yeah, it's YOUR money, but it's OUR overpriced tow-truck driver system. Without you, costs to tow wouldn't be so high. Oh, you would change your tire yourself? That's good. Everybody should know how to do that. But surely there is some task that you know of that the man in your life will do that you won't. He'll patch the roof himself. He'll give the car a tune-up.

...but I don't drive...or own a car...or a man, for that matter...

Btw, aspiring, I don't consider any of the things you listed to be feminine. I rarely wear make-up either, and not perceptibly if I do. Those aren't feminine things imo, they might be things girls do to give an illusion of femininity. But you can't fake it or paint it on. What I'm talking about is internal, not external.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Bitsy

What I'm talking about is internal, not external.

I don't think I fit the concept of "feminine" in many of the internal things either .

But I see what you mean.