posted July 01, 2014 08:41 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by FireMoon:
I see what you're saying. Although I started out at a private school where there were equally high standards for everyone- you were just expected to do your best. Followed by a public school where my impression was no one really gave a sh*t lol. And it's true there are more women enrolled on college than men, but if you break it down by degree programs- and which ones are actually making money (science and engineering vs liberal arts for example) there's still a huge divide. To generalize I think boys are encouraged and expected to like math and science (logical thinking) while girls are expected to like things like art, literature, etc. (emotional subjects) So maybe there's more praise and cooing over girls accomplishments, but I don't see how it makes much of a difference when you look at where everything ends up

---

That reminds me of something someone shared OL many years ago, a program that could, in theory, tell the difference between men and women by writing. At first I was intrigued and thought this went into so-called genderlects and would come with an analysis (what many don't realize is that language is much more than a tool and it can say a lot about a person, both as an individual and also their culture & demographics, similar to how DNA can, and it can also limit the ability to think by limiting or circumventing the language). Alas, no, it was a very simple game, you simply shared some writing and it gave "male" or "female" (I don't even recall probabilities being used).

Nevertheless I was curious so I started grabbing books as well as quoting articles and testing the software. It almost always got women wrong (it also identified me as male), and also got a few men wrong, but I finally realized that the only way it would recognize females was using emotionally charged language (unless there was profanity in which case it identified the writing as male) and basically assumed that if you mentioned feelings at all that you were female (interesting enough even "I'm angry" was also identified as female rather than male, though "I'm ****** off" was male). If feelings (including exclamation marks), names of emotions, or pop-psychology weren't a strong component of the writing then the software identified the author as male.

At that point I was pretty sure whoever designed that software was someone who had almost no contact with women since going to get some degree in computers (though that doesn't necessarily mean no women were in his classes) so that his exposure was about restricted to media representations and relatives where women are all about the feelings rather than actually thinking anything (though in my observation that describes a lot of people regardless of gender). I came up with an interesting story in my head how he was born brilliant into a dysfunctional family that was mentally dull so he used computers to escape rather than socialize with anyone as everyone else was more about the emotions (men using a lot more profanity) whereas he was a strong air sign. And perhaps his classes were mostly male and any woman he tended to date was from say the arts or psychology, especially if he felt terrible if some woman proved to be as good as him, or even better, at computers, since some men do find that emasculating and thus avoided any women who may have been in his class after all. (But it's also possible that there were no women in his classes, or only 1 or 2.)

Oh, btw, I read an article about that same time on how to get women more involved in video games. By some accident (I'm sure it was subconscious) the man who wrote it divided people into "people" & "women" (that is men are people, women are something else entirely, and no he wasn't using the word "people" to include both men & women as he would describe what "people" liked and what "women liked instead," an editor definitely should've pointed it out to him).

posted July 01, 2014 09:41 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by FireMoon:
To generalize I think boys are encouraged and expected to like math and science (logical thinking) while girls are expected to like things like art, literature, etc. (emotional subjects)

---

Also reminded me of this, just for a laugh:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w

posted July 01, 2014 09:50 AM            

quote:

---

On topic: I can't really relate so I probably won't go there. I am ok with embracing my feminine energy. I neither put feminine power/energy on a pedestal.. nor do I downplay it.
It's just not a topic that really resonates with me.. I'm basically in Cappy's boat lol … but slightly less cynical

---

Good ^^ I'm glad I don't have such dilemmas. Being moderately feminine is enough for me.

posted July 01, 2014 06:32 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PixieJane:
That reminds me of something someone shared OL many years ago, a program that could, in theory, tell the difference between men and women by writing. At first I was intrigued and thought this went into so-called genderlects and would come with an analysis (what many don't realize is that language is much more than a tool and it can say a lot about a person, both as an individual and also their culture & demographics, similar to how DNA can, and it can also limit the ability to think by limiting or circumventing the language). Alas, no, it was a very simple game, you simply shared some writing and it gave "male" or "female" (I don't even recall probabilities being used).

Nevertheless I was curious so I started grabbing books as well as quoting articles and testing the software. It almost always got women wrong (it also identified me as male), and also got a few men wrong, but I finally realized that the only way it would recognize females was using emotionally charged language (unless there was profanity in which case it identified the writing as male) and basically assumed that if you mentioned feelings at all that you were female (interesting enough even "I'm angry" was also identified as female rather than male, though "I'm ****** off" was male). If feelings (including exclamation marks), names of emotions, or pop-psychology weren't a strong component of the writing then the software identified the author as male.[QUOTE]

Yeah that's a little ridiculous since it would really depend on the subject or types of writing samples asked for. Edit nvm, the genderlects thing is really interesting tho

One more thing on the subject of girls being "naturally" drawn to certain subjects because of fundamental differences... which relates more to what AG was saying.. I know this is a verizon commercial (random) and there's some cheesy music in the background, but this link pretty much sums up my perspective on that
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XP3cyRRAfX0

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PixieJane:
Oh, btw, I read an article about that same time on how to get women more involved in video games. By some accident (I'm sure it was subconscious) the man who wrote it divided people into "people" & "women" (that is men are people, women are something else entirely, and no he wasn't using the word "people" to include both men & women as he would describe what "people" liked and what "women liked instead," an editor definitely should've pointed it out to him).

Though that said I'm friends with a guy who was a major name in role playing games who was also assigned to gain more female gamers (in order to increase sales) and how men planned to get it failed while ironically they were getting more without even trying and even threatening this accidental tactic getting them what they wanted to use sales tactics that didn't work and even alienated potential female customers as well as some loyal male fans (as best I recall, it's been many years since he explained that). He emailed me an explanation of that that I could try to find again if you're interested in a summary of what the industry thought would work and what actually did work.

---

posted July 01, 2014 06:57 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by FireMoon:
I see what you're saying. Although I started out at a private school where there were equally high standards for everyone- you were just expected to do your best. Followed by a public school where my impression was no one really gave a sh*t lol. And it's true there are more women enrolled on college than men, but if you break it down by degree programs- and which ones are actually making money (science and engineering vs liberal arts for example) there's still a huge divide. To generalize I think boys are encouraged and expected to like math and science (logical thinking) while girls are expected to like things like art, literature, etc. (emotional subjects) So maybe there's more praise and cooing over girls accomplishments, but I don't see how it makes much of a difference when you look at where everything ends up..

Also very true, I'd much rather watch an independent or foreign film with an interesting story than a generic chick flick/action movie, but unfortunately since the media has become so syndicated theres is an uneven playing field at least in the US and those don't tend to reach as wide of audiences..

---

posted July 01, 2014 10:16 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Selene:
The thing is... i really am feminine inside, but it has a hard time coming out.

---

posted July 01, 2014 10:22 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Odette:
I only really felt like posting here to say:
*WoW Lonake is in the house!!!*

It's awesome to see you back on LL, Lonake I'm not sure if you've been around in other forums, but I haven't seen you post in a really long time. I've missed you and I'm really excited that you're back!

---

posted July 01, 2014 11:14 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by KarkaQueen:
Remember that in the 18c and 19c men were praised for being highly skilled in literature, arts, and poetry and was considered improper for a woman to do so for the most part. Now he's called a sissy. Personally a man who prefers that over the stupid men we have these days obsessing over sports and athletics is more attractive.

---

posted July 01, 2014 11:53 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doux Rêve:
Lonake, nice to see you post more often. <3

You have an intimidating vibe.

My aspects are similar to yours but I'm not as outwardly "in charge". It's weird, I mean I feel both very feminine at times and very masculine at other times. And sometimes it's neither. (?) lol whatever, I guess I'll just try to be 'myself' and accept all the different parts of me.

One thing I've been thinking about, is, very often women complain that men aren't masculine/manly enough, that they're "the girl" and so on, and then you see women rebelling against femininity, and acting less stereotypically feminine than masculine. Now, how does that work? Men are supposed to stay manly all the time but women can just up and say, "I don't want to be feminine, screw ya'll, I'm gonna be as masculine as I want"? That's kind of unfair, isn't it? But it seems legit for many women, I think. Hmm.

---

hahaha.....everything you said is so true.

She does have an intimidating vibe and your vibe is very feminine at times, masculine at others and at others neither. I think that makes you interesting!

Your comment about double standards right on, it goes both ways.

I am not overly girly but I am feminine but lately I dont feel as in touch with my feminity as I have transit saturn squaring venus. I also feel old lately but I snapped out of it after realizing the transit was what was making me feel unattractive and old and have been feeling myself more.

I do hate all this pressure that women have on having to be super feminine all the time, constantly shop and look a certain way like if we are all models. I kind of rebel against it specially lately; I just dont want to shop; I dont enjoy wasting money so I can "feel good about myself and feel up to date" and so "I can feel good enough" etc... I refuse to do that........what ends up happening is you get bored of the clothing and it doesn't make you feel special anymore or the clothing goes bad and then you are back at the mall for more wasting money...

But I do want to look presentable bc of dignity and self respect but not to be in this vicious cycle were I rely on shopping to feel good about myself. I dont want that for me. I dont like going shopping; I kind of avoid it. I should just shop online when I feel I need to buy more clothing bc I need to look presentable not bc I am trying to feed this void of "not feeling good enough."

posted July 02, 2014 12:36 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by FireMoon:
One more thing on the subject of girls being "naturally" drawn to certain subjects because of fundamental differences... which relates more to what AG was saying.. I know this is a verizon commercial (random) and there's some cheesy music in the background, but this link pretty much sums up my perspective on that

---

Nice one! (I wasn't able to include the YT link in the quote, it just messed everything up.)

By coincidence I just saw this today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjJQBjWYDTs

I'm sure you'll like this, too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BumIt2pIRuw

But risking being overdoing it I thought I'd throw this scene in from Bridge to Terabithia (contrary to those who think the genders must war with each other this was done in a friendly banter that ended with both characters amused)...I can't recall if this was in the book or not:

quote:

---

"How come you're so good at that?"

"Good at what?"

"Building stuff. I mean, you're really good at it for a girl."

"Same way I'm fast... for a girl."

"You know what I mean."

"You're pretty good at art, for a boy."

"Okay, okay, truce."

---

posted July 02, 2014 01:27 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by FireMoon:
Ha yeah it probably was subconscious but not exactly surprising. I have nothing against video games in general, but even the way male/female characters are usually depicted in them says a lot really.. So yeah if you could find that summary I'd be interested to see it!

---

I was only able to find part of it (it was many emails back and forth and we deleted most to all of what was being replied to). First, one tidbit I found was on video games: some video game company wanted more female players and couldn't figure out why they couldn't get them (good reason to have more women working for you, I suppose). Their first thought was that the graphics of shooting monsters was too scary so they toned it done to shooting pink bunnies (presumably these people had college degrees and were at least in their mid-20s...think about that). Naturally, that project was wasted money.

Though they eventually discovered how to get a lot more girl gamers, and it was remarkably similar to what the guy who used to work for TSR was saying: story and characters (and willing to get a bit soap opera about it...like the TV series Buffy or even Firefly, I suppose).

The guy I was trading emails with worked with TSR helping develop and promote the tabletop fantasy role playing game D&D along with some others also put out by the same company. Long story short the company had faced some legal battles and wasn't as profitable as it had been (and the Satanic Panic was iffy, on one hand all the fundies trying to get people terrified of Satan stealing their children's souls was the best advertisement they ever had and the game became appealing to kids who wanted to shock adults, OTOH, parents still controlled a lot of the money and finding objectionable comics and music was much cheaper and easier), so they had to find new sources of revenue. My friend, who's a trained psychologist, was put in charge of the project to make D&D appealing.

He talked to several women in doing market research and actually had some good ideas, though some of the reactionary feminism of the time (still tinged by that 70s rage of feminism) sometimes made trouble for him and the company who had put a man in charge of such a project (and had they put Elaine Cunningham in charge then many of those complaining probably would've praised it instead). And on top of that he then had to present it to marketing (or as close to that as they had) who just simply couldn't escape "guy thinking" (much like video games later), that is if it didn't appeal to them then how could it appeal to women? What made D&D popular at the time was the random combat, the World of Warcraft atmosphere, and just fighting things and throwing in sexy women and I expect some of the borderline pornographic illustrations (such as for the succubus) helped sales a lot as well (I saw a first edition referee manual, the vocabulary was fantastic, but if you could only see the charts for sexual diseases and a very elaborate "random encounter table" on rolling up what kind of harlot a character ran into...personally I found it unintentionally hilarious).

And the guys playing often made a big deal out of stats on paper (like how strong you were and thus how much damage your character could do with a sword) and rolling dice (all about scoring) and featured a lot of "metagame thinking" (that is the story was sacrificed so that the players could use strategy unknown to their characters, and some products actually encouraged that) which appealed to guys but didn't impress girls. So they instead tried to make "amazon" characters while disregarding all his work (and the aforementioned feminists writing angry letters that marketing took into account didn't help him either, though feminists who actually cared, let alone women, were but a very tiny minority).

When that didn't work they then created HeartQuest books. I read a couple of these, typical romance novels with magic thrown in. (Just so we're clear I consider standard romance novels as realistic as bizarre porn fantasies and not very appealing to me personally, and in these cases you had almost nothing to go on as to WHY you should care about the hackneyed plot or any of the insipid characters, including the very important love interests. They were also less violent and more about being frightened, and happy when your love interest showed up, though you could at least save him, too.)

After this failed it looked as if TSR was about to give up, and yet they noticed they WERE growing a female fanbase, only instead of buying the games with the accessories they were buying the novels...they were even buying the magazines for the stories. It had something most of the gaming material didn't: actual plot, back story, history, and characters interesting and sympathetic enough to care about (romance existed but it wasn't as over the top silly as HeartQuest was, pretty much about what you'd find in a lot of adventure movies--well I did roll my eyes when 2 characters started smooching each other IN THE MIDDLE OF A BATTLE but that absurd scenerio happens a lot in movies, too). As it was one of the game designers got his wife interested and she came up with the Dragonlance concept, and has become a very popular D&D author since (though TSR still gave them a hard time over it, ego issues, but after Wizards bought them out then I think they got along better). Soon after gaming products exploited the popularity of the stories (and this style was transferred over to other campaign settings for D&D) and D&D was no longer just a boy's game.

Btw, the Dragonlance novels (which I checked out from the library) was how I first learned of D&D and made me a fan (though I didn't play, or even realized it was a game you could play) when I was 16. And I was invited to play when I was 17 which I did a lot that year, and then less and less after (you can read a little of what that was like for me, and how I got along with the mostly male players, here).

posted July 02, 2014 01:32 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by FireMoon:
^yes that was basically my point... (well I was originally trying to say you have to consider the distribution and earning potential of these degrees before claiming higher ed caters to women based on total enrollment numbers alone) but I don't think it's because of "natural" differences that these trends exist in academics

Anyway I agree Karka, I'm much more drawn to the "intellectuals"... and exactly, it doesn't matter what subject or interest they're passionate about as long as it's something more than just professional sports teams lol

---