![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 7 to 31 of 41. Go back in thread:
Posted by Tabitha on June 13, 2016, at 17:33:57
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news, posted by rjlockhart37 on June 12, 2016, at 21:21:22
> i think each author of the article has a opinion they want the reader to share......get them to see their idea, like seems like each news site has a goal or idea they follow, opinion wise, its hard to find just raw information, but it can be done mainly through internet browsing.....
I know, right? So many articles are just pushing an agenda or bias, and reaching to get every news item to illustrate their point.
>
> but my personal opinion is US is not as safe as it was, infiltration and alteration to laws to chnage the security, when 9/11 happened we all united together to keep the country safe, but it seems it faded, and all these new laws and liberal propaganda making it diffrent.....it's like people are blind
>
> rI remember when we thought nuclear war with the Soviet Union was an imminent possibility, then that threat faded, only to be replaced by Al Qaeda and ISIS. Meanwhile there are more and more of us stressing natural resources to the breaking point. It makes for a pretty glum big picture.
Posted by baseball55 on June 13, 2016, at 18:15:16
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » rjlockhart37, posted by Tabitha on June 13, 2016, at 17:33:57
I know what you mean about how depressing the news can be. For me, I feel like I live in a world where I don't understand half (at least) the people in it. I just don't get them at all. I get sick of reading about and hearing about all the violence and craziness, both here and abroad. A lot of foreign news just depresses me and makes me feel helpless. Many years ago, I would tune out whenever the topic of Northern Ireland and the IRA came on Then it was Serbia and Croatia and all that craziness. Now I tune out to ISIS and Syria. I don't get it and I don't want to think about it or feel responsible for it.
Posted by Tabitha on June 13, 2016, at 23:19:03
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Tabitha, posted by baseball55 on June 13, 2016, at 18:15:16
> I know what you mean about how depressing the news can be. For me, I feel like I live in a world where I don't understand half (at least) the people in it. I just don't get them at all. I get sick of reading about and hearing about all the violence and craziness, both here and abroad. A lot of foreign news just depresses me and makes me feel helpless. Many years ago, I would tune out whenever the topic of Northern Ireland and the IRA came on Then it was Serbia and Croatia and all that craziness. Now I tune out to ISIS and Syria. I don't get it and I don't want to think about it or feel responsible for it.
Yes, the foreign news is even more violent. It makes me think human civilization is really fragile, and I'm just fortunate to live in a place where there isn't overt warfare and social breakdown (yet). I'm not sure if that's a true picture or a distortion. Like, if I could see everyone on earth at once, how many people would be living peacefully and how many would be killing and preying on each other? What about through history? How much violence happens to or is done by people on average? Will there ever be less violence?
Posted by Phillipa on June 14, 2016, at 9:27:47
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » baseball55, posted by Tabitha on June 13, 2016, at 23:19:03
Tabitha Things like this didn't seem be heard about as now the speed of news comes with technology. I do not feel safe anymore either and it's not you. Some have said the world is coming to an end and not a religious person. But unless you refuse to listen to news. avoid social media it's not going to get better. Someone said yesterday that lives in Florida that I went to high school with that the real target of the shootings was a Disney Mall. I've always thought Disney World would be the next attack by ISIS. We didn't have these things in this country before the Wars were always elsewhere and now they are here on our soil. Phillipa
Posted by Tabitha on June 14, 2016, at 12:51:53
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Tabitha, posted by Phillipa on June 14, 2016, at 9:27:47
> Tabitha Things like this didn't seem be heard about as now the speed of news comes with technology. I do not feel safe anymore either and it's not you. Some have said the world is coming to an end and not a religious person.
Yeah, that's it. I don't exactly feel unsafe right here right now, but I feel like we're living on borrowed time. War, continued social breakdown, environmental catastrophe, they all seem inevitable. I'm glad I don't have children to worry about.
> I've always thought Disney World would be the next attack by ISIS.That would be really twisted. Like something out of a batman comic.
Posted by Tabitha on June 14, 2016, at 17:10:44
In reply to Emotional reactions to news, posted by Tabitha on June 12, 2016, at 17:26:44
Dear Self (and others), here's a nice article about natural variety in emotional response in such situations
http://the-orbit.net/almostdiamonds/2016/06/13/your-reaction-is-normal/
Posted by Horse on June 14, 2016, at 23:57:14
In reply to Emotional reactions to news, posted by Tabitha on June 12, 2016, at 17:26:44
Ack. I'm easily triggered, too, and always waiting for the other shoe to drop. After experiencing acute GAD, it doesn't take much to bring on a small but distinct taste of that episode. The US election almost got me until I realized I needed to take a break. However, we've four months still to go :)
Posted by Tabitha on June 15, 2016, at 11:53:56
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news, posted by Horse on June 14, 2016, at 23:57:14
> Ack. I'm easily triggered, too, and always waiting for the other shoe to drop. After experiencing acute GAD, it doesn't take much to bring on a small but distinct taste of that episode. The US election almost got me until I realized I needed to take a break. However, we've four months still to go :)
You know, I had several months of hellish anxiety from medical stuff a few years ago and I have wondered if that left me permanently vulnerable to it. I seem to get quick ramp-ups of anxiety from relatively minor events now, and I don't recall being like that in the past.
I am continually fighting the impulse to read everything I can about upsetting events vs avoid them. My reactivity will drop, then I test myself with new exposure. Perhaps I'm my own worst enemy.
Posted by Lamdage22 on June 19, 2016, at 14:26:12
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Horse, posted by Tabitha on June 15, 2016, at 11:53:56
They always bring the bad news. Where is the good !??
Posted by Dinah on July 6, 2016, at 22:36:58
In reply to Emotional reactions to news, posted by Tabitha on June 12, 2016, at 17:26:44
I've actually had several appointments with my therapist lately due to the news. Or rather the election. It has badly pushed my middle school buttons.
Ordinarily I go months between visits.
I'm still sort of obsessive about watching.
Posted by Dinah on July 6, 2016, at 22:49:00
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » baseball55, posted by Tabitha on June 13, 2016, at 23:19:03
I think I was way more likely to think the world was doomed when I was younger. After a while all the scares kind of make me detached. Somehow we muddle through. New hotspots break out. But I'd have never thought to see peace in Ireland or so much progress in Lebanon. We *did* make it through the cold war. There is always a disease or war that is supposed to end mankind, yet diseases are being fought and people eventually get worn out from war. In so many ways, things are better now than they ever were.
I know that's likely overly sanguine, and I might feel differently if I lived through WW2.
But the media seems to blow everything up into the newest disaster of disaster, and eventually you have to wonder if it's just good for their business.
Which doesn't stop me obsessively following the election and enriching their coffers...
Posted by Dinah on July 6, 2016, at 22:51:36
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Tabitha, posted by Dinah on July 6, 2016, at 22:49:00
To which I must add that if a disaster is personal to an individual, the world does sort of end, even if the global world keeps on ticking...
It's hard to keep those two viewpoints in mind, and I shift back and forth. The wider world will go on, but personal worlds shatter all too often.
Posted by Phillipa on July 6, 2016, at 23:00:30
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news, posted by Dinah on July 6, 2016, at 22:51:36
Dinah not you the World is in a turmoil and not much we can do about it. As for the election. I won't discuss politics but will say I would never ever vote for a know liar. And I personally don't feel a female should be a US President. Just my view irreguardless of who it were. Phillipa
Posted by Dinah on July 6, 2016, at 23:28:05
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Dinah, posted by Phillipa on July 6, 2016, at 23:00:30
You know, it's the oddest thing. I must have been born slightly too late to understand the big deal about male/female. No one ever told me I couldn't be anything I wanted to be. Girls were perhaps more likely than boys to be at the top of my classes. As many women as men of my acquaintance were likely to be the dominant member of families. I've been surprised to discover that Mormons have a bad reputation about feminism. Most of the Mormon women I grew up with were incredibly strong role models with husbands who respected them and treated them as equal partners. I've never had the tiniest pushback on my gender in the workplace. I don't think my parents ever in my life built any expectation whatsoever on my gender.
I don't ever remember being referred to as "sweetheart" or "darling" by anyone who didn't have the right to refer to me as such. I think perhaps once a speaker referred to "the little ladies" in the audience, and my husband put his hand over mine (as I muttered about being taller than the "gentleman" in question) and reminded me that he was from a different era. But that was an anomaly, not the norm. And in retrospect, more amusing than anything.
I barely even notice gender of presidential candidates. It surprises me that they're making any sort of deal about it at all.
Why shouldn't a woman be president? Even if you buy into arguments about hormones, surely that is no longer an issue in this particular case.
To be clear, I can honestly say that I am no particular fan of any person currently in the runoffs for President.
Posted by Horse on July 7, 2016, at 2:17:16
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Tabitha, posted by Dinah on July 6, 2016, at 22:36:58
> I've actually had several appointments with my therapist lately due to the news. Or rather the election. It has badly pushed my middle school buttons.
>
> Ordinarily I go months between visits.
>
> I'm still sort of obsessive about watching.
Yes, the election. I take forced breaks to survive the Fall.
Posted by Tabitha on July 7, 2016, at 14:37:48
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Dinah, posted by Phillipa on July 6, 2016, at 23:00:30
> And I personally don't feel a female should be a US President. Just my view irreguardless of who it were. Phillipa
OMG, Phillipa, I'm flabbergasted. And it's been a long time since I've used the word "flabbergasted"
Posted by Tabitha on July 7, 2016, at 14:46:02
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Tabitha, posted by Dinah on July 6, 2016, at 22:49:00
> In so many ways, things are better now than they ever were.
Yes, in many ways they are better. But I don't believe there's any sort of natural law of human progress in operation. I used to think that. I got pretty disillusioned by the losses in some areas where I thought I would see steady gains.
> But the media seems to blow everything up into the newest disaster of disaster, and eventually you have to wonder if it's just good for their business.
Exactly. Especially with the transition to internet media. It's all about creating stories that are immediately emotionally compelling, and the easiest way to do that is to push our outrage buttons (or our horror buttons, or our fear buttons).
Posted by Tabitha on July 7, 2016, at 14:53:58
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Phillipa, posted by Dinah on July 6, 2016, at 23:28:05
> You know, it's the oddest thing. I must have been born slightly too late to understand the big deal about male/female. No one ever told me I couldn't be anything I wanted to be. Girls were perhaps more likely than boys to be at the top of my classes. As many women as men of my acquaintance were likely to be the dominant member of families. I've been surprised to discover that Mormons have a bad reputation about feminism. Most of the Mormon women I grew up with were incredibly strong role models with husbands who respected them and treated them as equal partners. I've never had the tiniest pushback on my gender in the workplace. I don't think my parents ever in my life built any expectation whatsoever on my gender.
It's great that you grew up with that mindset. I got the message that women were inferior, or even if they weren't inferior, were supposed to be subservient to men anyway. I always rebelled against the idea. Even after escaping that background, I still struggled with it, because it was so difficult to distinguish sexism from just run of the mill lack of respect and consideration for others. I'm not sure why it even matters, really, but it just still outrages me to think I'm getting treated as less than based on my gender, or to have others dismiss the possibility.
> Even if you buy into arguments about hormones, surely that is no longer an issue in this particular case.ha ha ha, that's just what I was thinking. The hormonal factor just isn't so prevalent as we age.
Posted by Dinah on July 7, 2016, at 18:03:47
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Dinah, posted by Horse on July 7, 2016, at 2:17:16
> Yes, the election. I take forced breaks to survive the Fall.
>I probably need to go cold turkey. It's as if I'm afraid to look away for fear I'll miss something important. But truth to tell, I could probably cut myself off completely from news, and just pay attention in November. There'll be hundreds of ups and downs between now and then.
Posted by Dinah on July 7, 2016, at 18:07:52
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Dinah, posted by Tabitha on July 7, 2016, at 14:46:02
> Yes, in many ways they are better. But I don't believe there's any sort of natural law of human progress in operation. I used to think that. I got pretty disillusioned by the losses in some areas where I thought I would see steady gains.
Oh, I agree. If there's one positive thing this election has done, it's to challenge certain assumptions I have about the nature of mankind. And that's only positive in that I now have to do a self correction when I find myself being dismissive of certain issues.
Posted by Dinah on July 7, 2016, at 18:24:23
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Dinah, posted by Tabitha on July 7, 2016, at 14:53:58
> It's great that you grew up with that mindset. I got the message that women were inferior, or even if they weren't inferior, were supposed to be subservient to men anyway. I always rebelled against the idea. Even after escaping that background, I still struggled with it, because it was so difficult to distinguish sexism from just run of the mill lack of respect and consideration for others. I'm not sure why it even matters, really, but it just still outrages me to think I'm getting treated as less than based on my gender, or to have others dismiss the possibility.
I'd be really interested if you could share some specific examples of how that was conveyed to you.
I'm trying to think of how I learned the opposite. It's got nothing to do with careers, per se. I think there was a lot of expectation on me to live up to my potential, whether as homemaker or doctor or President. It may be that I come from a long line of strong stubborn women. :) Or it may have been that although my father worked longer hours than my mother, he did most of the cooking and a fair amount of other things around the house. Whoever cared the most took over any given task. Battles were won on both sides, based again more on who cared enough to keep fighting.
Was it gender specific feedback you got at home, or a general tearing down of self confidence? Were brothers considered to matter more? Did a father's wishes always override a mother's? Was it learned directly or through example? If you care to share...
Posted by Tabitha on July 8, 2016, at 13:40:14
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Tabitha, posted by Dinah on July 7, 2016, at 18:24:23
> I'd be really interested if you could share some specific examples of how that was conveyed to you.
The idea was everywhere, but not explicitly spoken. All the leaders I saw were male, except elementary school teachers. (Yet even with teachers, as you moved up in grades there were more and more male teachers, which conveyed to me the idea that male teachers were higher status.) The TV news anchors were male. Narrators on TV shows were male. The lead characters on cartoons were always male. Female characters, when present at all, were ultra-feminine and presented as romance interests. I remember being very confused, watching Bugs Bunny, Popeye, and so forth, that there was different music for when female characters appeared, and the male character suddenly had hearts popping out of his eyes. The original Star Trek was the first grownup TV show I saw. Again, the lead characters were all males, the few women were part of sex/romance subplots.
In social situations and families, it seemed like people showed more respect and deference to males. It seemed the women shrank back a bit, to let the males take center stage. Males got the "good" chair in the living room. Males had the better car (sportier, more expensive), and whenever Dad was in the family car, he drove, even though Mom was perfectly capable of driving.
At family gatherings, men sat around watching TV and playing games while women cooked. Then we ate, male at the head of the table, male saying the blessing, then once again women cleaned while men watched TV and played games. I never saw the men do even a token amount of helping. It just struck me as ridiculous and unfair.
In church, the pastor was always male, the Sunday school teachers always female. Again, that said to me that men led adults, and women only led children.
I remember movies (probably old 50s movies that were running on local TV in the 70s) where single women characters were pathetic stereotypes of desperation. Younger women were solely focused on getting their man. The women's stories always ended with marriage. Comedies had jokes about women needing to be reigned in by their husbands. There were shows where the dad was wise and amazing and everyone deferred to him (naturally), and other shows where the dad was a huge jerk but everyone deferred to him anyway.
Any time overt sexism came up, even as jokes in conversation, I don't recall my mom ever defending women. Instead, I recall her criticizing her mother-in-law, who she said was "domineering" toward her husband, and how wrong that was. My mom rarely said critical things about other people, so that really stood out. I got the idea mom thought that things just worked better, and were more right somehow, when women were subservient to men. Yet she also told me that there were "ways to get your way without seeming like you're getting your way" which must have been a necessary survival skill for her to have, while supporting the necessary order of things.
In my own family, my brother always got the larger bedroom. I complained that it was unfair. My mom's explanation was that he had larger furniture. I didn't think to point out that it was unfair he got larger furniture.
For maybe a year it was a fad among the boys to call each other a "woman" as an insult. They put the emphasis on the first syllable, "you're a WOMan". I was thinking, wait, why is it an insult to be a woman? My brother even called me a WOMan. I told him it didn't make sense because I was a woman. But most of the time he called me a dog. I remember it as him calling me a dog all through my childhood, in private and in front of my parents, and rarely if ever getting told to stop. So there was the heirarchy, laid out in children's insults. Put down the boys by calling them WOMan (the level below, even though they were boys and a WOMan was presumably an adult female). Put down the girls by calling them dogs (because to go lower than a girl you have to be a dog).
Personally, I never felt my family had any expectation for me whatsoever. By the time my brother was 6 or 7, I knew that my father insisted he would go to college. It was not mentioned for me. All through school, I was a top student, and he was an average student. I wasn't commended for my grades, and I was confused by it. I assumed it was because they didn't want to show up my brother. Which isn't necessarily sexism, but it was part of not feeling like my achievements mattered. In general, when the family talked about others, it seemed like the males' lives were of more interest and importance.
And this was before anyone in my family got into Christian fundamentalism. Then the hierarchy became overt. Men were the head of the family, women their "help-meet". The universe would come crashing down, apparently, if women were considered equals to men. My mom married a man that was less than her in any metric you could come up with-- education, intelligence, finances, family status, ability to get along with people, health, yet she was bound and determined to make him head of the household.
>
> it may have been that although my father worked longer hours than my mother, he did most of the cooking and a fair amount of other things around the house.I think if I had seen that, it would have made a big impression. In my 20s I spent a holiday with friends of a friend, and the husband cooked, brought us (ladies) drinks, and left the room so we could all talk. I was gobsmacked. I had literally never seen a bunch of women (a) get to have fun and be the center of attention or (b) have the husband bring drinks.
> Whoever cared the most took over any given task. Battles were won on both sides, based again more on who cared enough to keep fighting.Yeah, that's how it works with my current in-laws. Back home, things were just so much more gendered. And women were defined by their ability to keep an immaculate house.
>
> Was it gender specific feedback you got at home, or a general tearing down of self confidence? Were brothers considered to matter more? Did a father's wishes always override a mother's? Was it learned directly or through example? If you care to share...
>So that was a lot of examples. In general it was just a feeling that everyone around me agreed idea that males were the natural leaders, or entitled to the lead role whether or not they deserved it. And it just irked me, because I felt like a full human being. I had a sense of justice, and I wasn't naturally drawn to subservience, housework, child-care, or ultra-feminine clothing.
Posted by SLS on July 8, 2016, at 14:36:03
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Dinah, posted by Tabitha on July 8, 2016, at 13:40:14
Thanks for posting this. It makes for quite a treatise.
I grew up in the 1960s before feminism exerted any influence. Everything you described here is very familiar. Of course, in retrospect, it was absurd to treat women such that everyone accepted that there be subordinate roles that society dictated they assume. I was not immune to this. I had been exposed to very sexist messages growing up. At age 20, I remember being angry that my girlfriend began working. That was my job. I think I was also afraid of her becoming independent. In my mind, college was not for women to develop a career. It was just something to do to fill time. How very immature of me. I was clueless. Fortunately, I educated myself out of most of these role stereotypes and false sexist ideas. I discovered that I enjoy my relationships with women more when there is the presumption of equality and the recognition of, and respect for, each other's egos.
- Scott----------------------------------------------------
> > I'd be really interested if you could share some specific examples of how that was conveyed to you.
>
> The idea was everywhere, but not explicitly spoken. All the leaders I saw were male, except elementary school teachers. (Yet even with teachers, as you moved up in grades there were more and more male teachers, which conveyed to me the idea that male teachers were higher status.) The TV news anchors were male. Narrators on TV shows were male. The lead characters on cartoons were always male. Female characters, when present at all, were ultra-feminine and presented as romance interests. I remember being very confused, watching Bugs Bunny, Popeye, and so forth, that there was different music for when female characters appeared, and the male character suddenly had hearts popping out of his eyes. The original Star Trek was the first grownup TV show I saw. Again, the lead characters were all males, the few women were part of sex/romance subplots.
>
> In social situations and families, it seemed like people showed more respect and deference to males. It seemed the women shrank back a bit, to let the males take center stage. Males got the "good" chair in the living room. Males had the better car (sportier, more expensive), and whenever Dad was in the family car, he drove, even though Mom was perfectly capable of driving.
>
> At family gatherings, men sat around watching TV and playing games while women cooked. Then we ate, male at the head of the table, male saying the blessing, then once again women cleaned while men watched TV and played games. I never saw the men do even a token amount of helping. It just struck me as ridiculous and unfair.
>
> In church, the pastor was always male, the Sunday school teachers always female. Again, that said to me that men led adults, and women only led children.
>
> I remember movies (probably old 50s movies that were running on local TV in the 70s) where single women characters were pathetic stereotypes of desperation. Younger women were solely focused on getting their man. The women's stories always ended with marriage. Comedies had jokes about women needing to be reigned in by their husbands. There were shows where the dad was wise and amazing and everyone deferred to him (naturally), and other shows where the dad was a huge jerk but everyone deferred to him anyway.
>
> Any time overt sexism came up, even as jokes in conversation, I don't recall my mom ever defending women. Instead, I recall her criticizing her mother-in-law, who she said was "domineering" toward her husband, and how wrong that was. My mom rarely said critical things about other people, so that really stood out. I got the idea mom thought that things just worked better, and were more right somehow, when women were subservient to men. Yet she also told me that there were "ways to get your way without seeming like you're getting your way" which must have been a necessary survival skill for her to have, while supporting the necessary order of things.
>
> In my own family, my brother always got the larger bedroom. I complained that it was unfair. My mom's explanation was that he had larger furniture. I didn't think to point out that it was unfair he got larger furniture.
>
> For maybe a year it was a fad among the boys to call each other a "woman" as an insult. They put the emphasis on the first syllable, "you're a WOMan". I was thinking, wait, why is it an insult to be a woman? My brother even called me a WOMan. I told him it didn't make sense because I was a woman. But most of the time he called me a dog. I remember it as him calling me a dog all through my childhood, in private and in front of my parents, and rarely if ever getting told to stop. So there was the heirarchy, laid out in children's insults. Put down the boys by calling them WOMan (the level below, even though they were boys and a WOMan was presumably an adult female). Put down the girls by calling them dogs (because to go lower than a girl you have to be a dog).
>
> Personally, I never felt my family had any expectation for me whatsoever. By the time my brother was 6 or 7, I knew that my father insisted he would go to college. It was not mentioned for me. All through school, I was a top student, and he was an average student. I wasn't commended for my grades, and I was confused by it. I assumed it was because they didn't want to show up my brother. Which isn't necessarily sexism, but it was part of not feeling like my achievements mattered. In general, when the family talked about others, it seemed like the males' lives were of more interest and importance.
>
> And this was before anyone in my family got into Christian fundamentalism. Then the hierarchy became overt. Men were the head of the family, women their "help-meet". The universe would come crashing down, apparently, if women were considered equals to men. My mom married a man that was less than her in any metric you could come up with-- education, intelligence, finances, family status, ability to get along with people, health, yet she was bound and determined to make him head of the household.
>
>
> >
> > it may have been that although my father worked longer hours than my mother, he did most of the cooking and a fair amount of other things around the house.
>
> I think if I had seen that, it would have made a big impression. In my 20s I spent a holiday with friends of a friend, and the husband cooked, brought us (ladies) drinks, and left the room so we could all talk. I was gobsmacked. I had literally never seen a bunch of women (a) get to have fun and be the center of attention or (b) have the husband bring drinks.
>
>
> > Whoever cared the most took over any given task. Battles were won on both sides, based again more on who cared enough to keep fighting.
>
> Yeah, that's how it works with my current in-laws. Back home, things were just so much more gendered. And women were defined by their ability to keep an immaculate house.
>
>
> >
> > Was it gender specific feedback you got at home, or a general tearing down of self confidence? Were brothers considered to matter more? Did a father's wishes always override a mother's? Was it learned directly or through example? If you care to share...
> >
>
> So that was a lot of examples. In general it was just a feeling that everyone around me agreed idea that males were the natural leaders, or entitled to the lead role whether or not they deserved it. And it just irked me, because I felt like a full human being. I had a sense of justice, and I wasn't naturally drawn to subservience, housework, child-care, or ultra-feminine clothing.
>
>
Posted by Tabitha on July 8, 2016, at 17:12:01
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » Tabitha, posted by SLS on July 8, 2016, at 14:36:03
> Thanks for posting this. It makes for quite a treatise.
You're welcome. It was a really thought-provoking question.
>
> I grew up in the 1960s before feminism exerted any influence. Everything you described here is very familiar.I was in the 70s in the heartland/bible belt, so the influence of feminism was fairly marginal. Fortunately I picked up on what leaked in through the limited pre-internet media channels.
> Of course, in retrospect, it was absurd to treat women such that everyone accepted that there be subordinate roles that society dictated they assume.
Right? What a source of strife and waste of human potential.
> I was not immune to this. I had been exposed to very sexist messages growing up. At age 20, I remember being angry that my girlfriend began working. That was my job. I think I was also afraid of her becoming independent. In my mind, college was not for women to develop a career. It was just something to do to fill time.
Right, I remember the joke that they were working on their "MRS" degrees. As if education would be wasted on them.
> Fortunately, I educated myself out of most of these role stereotypes and false sexist ideas. I discovered that I enjoy my relationships with women more when there is the presumption of equality and the recognition of, and respect for, each other's egos.
I assume many men are glad to be relieved of the expectation of being one-up all the time. It's good to hear of your personal evolution.
Posted by SLS on July 8, 2016, at 19:11:06
In reply to Re: Emotional reactions to news » SLS, posted by Tabitha on July 8, 2016, at 17:12:01
> > I grew up in the 1960s before feminism exerted any influence. Everything you described here is very familiar.
I was actually born in 1960, but I remember quite a bit of that decade. I even remember watching the Cuban missile crisis on TV. I was 2.5 years old. It scared me because my mother was crying.
- Scott
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.