|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Feb 13, 2020 1:16:39 GMT
I am not taken aback by anything yet. I wanted you to clarify and expand on your point because I wasn't quite clear on what you meant by "minority". I was looking at it as numbers, not so much the community of dominance which is a good point and where white working class males have reigned in the past. I don't always rely on stats, these are not quite expressive of the entire picture and can be anecdotal, but do give an indication of trends. That is why there is so much contention regarding migration and part of the reason the UK have this Brexit debacle. Political shortsightedness of how it's own people were feeling.
I don't live in the US, so I can only go by what I have experienced and perceive, but the US has a population bursting at the seams and the diversity will be so much more apparent. It still boils down to exploitation by the ruling establishment, just at the expense of those from migrant and\or ethnic backgrounds are being herded into these labor roles. Cheap labor!
As for females, equality is only being gained in certain (smaller pockets) sectors which does not include the more physically demanding, construction, trade and infrastructure roles which working class males of many creeds do dominate. Soon to be ruled over by female bosses, because they have become pussy assed... 
More like heavy lifting is no longer as necessary as it once was. Women can load a truck as well as a man, because they can drive forklifts too. All working class are becoming subordinate to automation. And the old “head of the household” excuse to pay men more than women no longer applies since women are just as likely to head families. The working class white male is blaming the people once “below” him for stuff being done above him. The main point though, is that women are not actively seeking out these infrastructure roles, and I am not seeing robots turning up at my door to do a trade job. It is largely white Caucasian males I see. Female interest in these fields does not appeal to most and even many men rely on other males to do this. If women are now earning parity with wages, (not earnings), there is still the desperate need for many females to have males around, especially those that are practical and Mr. Fix It's, because they keep it all together.
Working class males (it doesn't matter then what color they are) are now becoming subservient to those above and this still involves both genders and many women are not this get up and go aggressive executive type either. Men have held it together for donkey's years, for their women and families, (even fought and gave their lives for the establishment), I don't blame them for wanting to "complain" about getting shafted. At any rate, my dynamic is different, and the straight working class male have bred themselves into submission.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Feb 13, 2020 1:57:29 GMT
As for females, equality is only being gained in certain (smaller pockets) sectors which does not include the more physically demanding, construction, trade and infrastructure roles which working class males of many creeds do dominate. Soon to be ruled over by female bosses, because they have become pussy assed...
More like heavy lifting is no longer as necessary as it once was. Women can load a truck as well as a man, because they can drive forklifts too. All working class are becoming subordinate to automation. And the old “head of the household” excuse to pay men more than women no longer applies since women are just as likely to head families. The working class white male is blaming the people once “below” him for stuff being done above him. The main point though, is that women are not actively seeking out these infrastructure roles, and I am not seeing robots turning up at my door to do a trade job. It is largely white Caucasian males I see. Female interest in these fields does not appeal to most and even many men rely on other males to do this. If women are now earning parity with wages, (not earnings), there is still the desperate need for many females to have males around, especially those that are practical and Mr. Fix It's, because they keep it all together.
Working class males (it doesn't matter then what color they are) are now becoming subservient to those above and this still involves both genders and many women are not this get up and go aggressive executive type either. Men have held it together for donkey's years, for their women and families, (even fought and gave their lives for the establishment), I don't blame them for wanting to "complain" about getting shafted. At any rate, my dynamic is different, and the straight working class male have bred themselves into submission. They blaming the wrong people and reasons for the shaft is my point. I’ve little sympathy for with white brothers. They think they’re the only ones who have it bad. Well, tough. Welcome to 21st century.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Feb 13, 2020 2:12:14 GMT
The main point though, is that women are not actively seeking out these infrastructure roles, and I am not seeing robots turning up at my door to do a trade job. It is largely white Caucasian males I see. Female interest in these fields does not appeal to most and even many men rely on other males to do this. If women are now earning parity with wages, (not earnings), there is still the desperate need for many females to have males around, especially those that are practical and Mr. Fix It's, because they keep it all together.
Working class males (it doesn't matter then what color they are) are now becoming subservient to those above and this still involves both genders and many women are not this get up and go aggressive executive type either. Men have held it together for donkey's years, for their women and families, (even fought and gave their lives for the establishment), I don't blame them for wanting to "complain" about getting shafted. At any rate, my dynamic is different, and the straight working class male have bred themselves into submission. They blaming the wrong people and reasons for the shaft is my point. I’ve little sympathy for with white brothers. They think they’re the only ones who have it bad. Well, tough. Welcome to 21st century. How smug and virtuous of you, with a double dose of sleaze, especially if you are white and male.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Feb 13, 2020 2:20:07 GMT
They blaming the wrong people and reasons for the shaft is my point. I’ve little sympathy for with white brothers. They think they’re the only ones who have it bad. Well, tough. Welcome to 21st century. How smug and virtuous of you, with a double dose of sleaze, especially if you are white and male. Oh, shut up, whimp.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Feb 13, 2020 2:33:14 GMT
How smug and virtuous of you, with a double dose of sleaze, especially if you are white and male. Oh, shut up, whimp. You would give up your balls to prove how virtuous shiny you are. Women love wimps like you, that you can white knight and impress, to show them how "woke" you are. Thing is, I don't imagine you do this to get laid, so your agenda is more deceptive. I wouldn't trust you as far as I could throw you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Feb 13, 2020 2:43:57 GMT
You would give up your balls to prove how virtuous shiny you are. Women love wimps like you, that you can white knight and impress, to show them how "woke" you are. Thing is, I don't imagine you do this to get laid, so your agenda is more deceptive. I wouldn't trust you as far as I could throw you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Feb 13, 2020 2:46:07 GMT
You would give up your balls to prove how virtuous shiny you are. Women love wimps like you, that you can white knight and impress, to show them how "woke" you are. Thing is, I don't imagine you do this to get laid, so your agenda is more deceptive. I wouldn't trust you as far as I could throw you. I get the last laugh.... 
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Feb 13, 2020 2:47:54 GMT
I get the last laugh.... You can have it, it’s all you got though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Feb 13, 2020 2:49:44 GMT
I get the last laugh.... You can have it, it’s all you got though. Well, I doubt most women would be interested in what you've got, they would be laughing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Feb 13, 2020 2:54:22 GMT
You can have it, it’s all you got though. Well, I doubt most women would be interested in what you've got, they would be laughing. I’m old. My dating days are over, kid. Now go play with yourself. Good-night.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Feb 13, 2020 2:58:35 GMT
Well, I doubt most women would be interested in what you've got, they would be laughing. I’m old. My dating days are over, kid. Now go play with yourself. Good-night. Old and demented by the sound of it. Did you ever have much luck? As one gets older, the estrogen levels increase. I'd say this is what has confused you.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Feb 13, 2020 2:59:18 GMT
Actually I don't want to sound like the proverbial "angry white male" because I'm not. White males are the most privileged human beings on earth. But what annoys me is that white females from privileged middle class backgrounds have manipulated affirmative action. No one helps the working class white male. Women are now almost 60% of college graduates and are dominating new management positions. Working class males are digging ditches and working construction. How many women do you see doing construction or highway maintenance? Zero. If the working class white male would admit he needs help from a failing economy for all workers and lay the blame on where it belongs instead of whining that it’s Libs, it’s the women, it’s the affirmative action, it’s anything but the vestiges of Reaganomics, then his plight will improve. But the working class white male would rather rip the whole bar apart than admit he’s as vulnerable as any other minority. My larger point here is about class. Why are females from upper middle class families, who have the luxury of daddy's money, given preference over males who grew up in poverty? My point here is that the biggest discrimination in our society is related to class and money, not gender. The proof of this is that 60% of college graduates are female.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Feb 13, 2020 3:13:47 GMT
No one helps the working class white male. If the working class white male would admit he needs help from a failing economy for all workers and lay the blame on where it belongs instead of whining that it’s Libs, it’s the women, it’s the affirmative action, it’s anything but the vestiges of Reaganomics, then his plight will improve. But the working class white male would rather rip the whole bar apart than admit he’s as vulnerable as any other minority. My larger point here is about class. Why are females from upper middle class families, who have the luxury of daddy's money, given preference over males who grew up in poverty? My point here is that the biggest discrimination in our society is related to class and money, not gender. The proof of this is that 60% of college graduates are female. Oh, but to Paulssmirk, class is not the issue, it is the racist and sexist white working class male that deserves to cop it, for being such a jerk, even though the upper echelon had used and suppressed him for so long. Now they are doing the same to the migrant. Now, he just has to suck it up and swallow his pride. Equal opportunity is not even fair opportunity, because it just isn't affordable for some. It only exists on selective terms.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Feb 13, 2020 3:38:28 GMT
My larger point here is about class. Why are females from upper middle class families, who have the luxury of daddy's money, given preference over males who grew up in poverty? My point here is that the biggest discrimination in our society is related to class and money, not gender. The proof of this is that 60% of college graduates are female. Oh, but to Paulssmirk, class is not the issue, it is the racist and sexist white working class male that deserves to cop it, for being such a jerk, even though the upper echelon had used and suppressed him for so long. Now they are doing the same to the migrant. Now, he just has to suck it up and swallow his pride. Equal opportunity is not even fair opportunity, because it just isn't affordable for some. It only exists on selective terms. You don't want equal opportunity, you want privilege. Well, boo-hoo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Feb 13, 2020 3:48:00 GMT
Oh, but to Paulssmirk, class is not the issue, it is the racist and sexist white working class male that deserves to cop it, for being such a jerk, even though the upper echelon had used and suppressed him for so long. Now they are doing the same to the migrant. Now, he just has to suck it up and swallow his pride. Equal opportunity is not even fair opportunity, because it just isn't affordable for some. It only exists on selective terms. You don't want equal opportunity, you want privilege. Well, boo-hoo. There is no such thing as equal opportunity, that is the point. I am not entitled like some, but as rhetoric that gets thrown around, like equal opportunity and equal opportunity of outcome, this is a fallacy and something that those that do have the means (due to privilege), then use this to manipulate and deceive others. They act as though they got what they have, because they worked so hard. Perhaps they did, but how much harder did they work and compared to what and whom?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Feb 13, 2020 4:46:37 GMT
You don't want equal opportunity, you want privilege. Well, boo-hoo. There is no such thing as equal opportunity, that is the point. I am not entitled like some, but as rhetoric that gets thrown around, like equal opportunity and equal opportunity of outcome, this is a fallacy and something that those that do have the means (due to privilege), then use this to manipulate and deceive others. They act as though they got what they have, because they worked so hard. Perhaps they did, but how much harder did they work and compared to what and whom? For centuries, no matter how hard they worked, people who were white men were not given equality or opportunity. You were born at the wrong time, kid.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Feb 13, 2020 5:31:04 GMT
There is no such thing as equal opportunity, that is the point. I am not entitled like some, but as rhetoric that gets thrown around, like equal opportunity and equal opportunity of outcome, this is a fallacy and something that those that do have the means (due to privilege), then use this to manipulate and deceive others. They act as though they got what they have, because they worked so hard. Perhaps they did, but how much harder did they work and compared to what and whom? For centuries, no matter how hard they worked, people who were white men were not given equality or opportunity. You were born at the wrong time, kid. It is not just "white men", which you appear to take umbrage too. This takes the same bias and prejudice approach you accuse others of. The promotion of "equal opportunity" and the fallacy behind it is all lies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Feb 13, 2020 11:27:09 GMT
It is what I was talking about though, in response to you suggesting I had it backwards. I haven't argued with you that brain isn't biology and have always stated it is organ and that mind is more and beyond brain.
Common sense is what is rational mind in terms of thinking and action. It can't be anything but and perception and insight also work in with this. Terms can be important, but there are so many of similar meaning in the English language, that it is anything but precise and never often is. Sometimes though, yes, sharpness can shine through. That is up to each person though to make that connection.
Science, as a complex and complicated study, is something that most people, regardless of how intelligent they are, is ever going to be something that most will fully comprehend. Any scientific claims made can also appear meaningless, as it will only connect with those in a specialized field and even then, it can be conjecture and speculation. Like psychology and philosophy, it in itself can also be abstract. For Peterson, he will take what is researched largely through his own field of study to make analysis and comprehension out of his findings. As a professional, that is all that can be asked of him and the manner of delivery of the message is key. I will need to source more interviews with him though, especially regarding his own sense of science to make up my own mind here.
I am not going to waste my time on phony sentimentality, sympathy and preciousness of others, when they are all caught up in the image of "self" and connect with the body as the be all end all of everything. You do realize this is arrogance of thought and mind? I will reserve my empathy and compassion for what I feel is more relevant and worthy, and I already gave you an example of how I put these TG psychological issues into perspective.
You know nothing about me, or what I have experienced in my life, nor I you. You have no business to claim what I should or shouldn't be concerned about. Are you suggesting that I should be concerned about what you believe is important? That can only make one look selfish and conceited and not to mention hypocritical.
Common sense and rationality are two completely different things. Common sense are adaptive biases applied to everyday circumstances; rationality is the study of what forms of reasoning reliably map reality. Sometimes those two things overlap, but just as often they do not. Common sense tells us not to walk off a cliff, but rationality helps us to explain gravity. You can't use common sense to explain gravity, but without common sense we probably wouldn't have survived to be able to. Yes, many scientific fields are large and complex; this hardly prevents us from learning many things from them. There are many popular science magazines that even report findings to general audiences with the technical jargon removed. Yes, some science is also only of interest to those in specific fields, but when we're talking facts of human psychology, like now as it relates to sex and gender, then the science on the issue surely isn't only a specialized interest. Yet there are plenty of people making all kinds of claims about this stuff without knowing a lick of the science, and that's disturbing. I'm sure Peterson is reasoning from what research he knows, but that hardly means he knows all of the relevant research. This isn't a knock against him because, as the saying goes, "art is long, and life is short," and we are finite beings who can only know so much; but it's a reminder to not take his word as Gospel. In fact, don't take any intellectual's word as Gospel. Listen to many, keep an open mind, and try to separate the good from the bad. There needn't be anything phony about sympathy unless you're a sociopath with no conscience. We all suffer for a variety of reasons, so it's not unreasonable to have some respect for that suffering and try to ease and heal, rather than harm, regardless of the source. It's human nature to worry about our "self image" as it affects how we interact with others and vice versa. Saying "don't worry about it" might work if we were all loners and hermits, but it's not as easy in mutually dependent societies. This is nothing to do with arrogance. The desire to be accepted by others is not arrogance in the slightest. If anything, arrogance is the opposite, the belief that you're perfect and don't need to change anything because others and what they think don't matter. Arrogance takes confidence and adds that "lack of conscience," sociopathic element. I didn't claim to know anything about you. I said that I hope you don't face any kind of mental trauma only to have people tell you what you feel is trivial and unimportant, as you're doing with transgender people. We should all be concerned with human suffering in whatever form it takes. If you aren't, then fine, I can't make you. But you'll get what you give in life. Personally, I've suffered extreme physical and mental anguish in my life; one is not worse than the other, they can both be absolutely crippling. Would I have had it "easier" if I was transgender? I can't say, but nobody can, and that's the point. You're trying to minimize a mental trauma you know nothing about. It's like people telling victims of depression to just "get over it" without understanding a lick about depression works biologically. I don't know how you can say that the brain is an organ, but that people who are suffering because something's "wrong" in that organ should just "get over it," as if we all have the ability to fix things that go wrong with our brains. Might as well as tell gunshot victims to "get over it." What we, as a society, really need to get over is this delusion that the brain is fundamentally different than the body, that we can fix anything mental as long as we're strong enough. That's a big, fat lie and a big reason why mental healthcare in the US is so appalling. Common sense and rationality are best to work both hand in hand. One needs to be rational thinking in the first place, in order to employ common sense.
No one can know all the relevant research and even if they think they are researching sources from recommendations, it could be a bumsteer. It is still all knowledge and with science, and what we are discussing here, much can still be conjecture.
I disagree. I don't do sympathy well, it is falling into a trap of pity and 'victimhood' and sometimes it might not help the receiver. If that makes me a sociopath with no conscience, then so be it, because I know that is not true. It is the semantic thing again, if words are that important, but empathy falls more into the realm of compassionate mind. One can see the issue and even cause and take appropriate steps of care, but doesn't take it on board and is capable of stepping away from, without taking it all on. Do you think professional and skilled psychiatrists and doctors are being sympathetic, when they are consulting, analyzing and operating. What good does sympathy do to help?
Human suffering that is born of mind games, is not the same of human suffering born out of realness of physical deformity. Whatever a transgendered person is going through, is not the worst of what can happen to somebody. It does not move me at all. I accept and acknowledge their need to identify as they feel and choose and request. I cannot under any circumstance, be expected to understand what is going on with their own psychology of mind. Take them to a children's cancer ward, and perhaps they just might start to put things into more perspective. People have to fight for their own sanity of mind and "self" image IS one of the biggest issues we have. What is there to worry about self-image, as opposed to somebody who has been badly burned and scarred in a horrendous accident, or somebody who has lost the use of a limb or organ. To me, TG issues are minimal, compared to bigger picture. Depression also works in with what I have just mentioned about putting things into perspective and I speak from experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Feb 14, 2020 2:18:23 GMT
Common sense and rationality are two completely different things. Common sense are adaptive biases applied to everyday circumstances; rationality is the study of what forms of reasoning reliably map reality. Sometimes those two things overlap, but just as often they do not. Common sense tells us not to walk off a cliff, but rationality helps us to explain gravity. You can't use common sense to explain gravity, but without common sense we probably wouldn't have survived to be able to. Yes, many scientific fields are large and complex; this hardly prevents us from learning many things from them. There are many popular science magazines that even report findings to general audiences with the technical jargon removed. Yes, some science is also only of interest to those in specific fields, but when we're talking facts of human psychology, like now as it relates to sex and gender, then the science on the issue surely isn't only a specialized interest. Yet there are plenty of people making all kinds of claims about this stuff without knowing a lick of the science, and that's disturbing. I'm sure Peterson is reasoning from what research he knows, but that hardly means he knows all of the relevant research. This isn't a knock against him because, as the saying goes, "art is long, and life is short," and we are finite beings who can only know so much; but it's a reminder to not take his word as Gospel. In fact, don't take any intellectual's word as Gospel. Listen to many, keep an open mind, and try to separate the good from the bad. There needn't be anything phony about sympathy unless you're a sociopath with no conscience. We all suffer for a variety of reasons, so it's not unreasonable to have some respect for that suffering and try to ease and heal, rather than harm, regardless of the source. It's human nature to worry about our "self image" as it affects how we interact with others and vice versa. Saying "don't worry about it" might work if we were all loners and hermits, but it's not as easy in mutually dependent societies. This is nothing to do with arrogance. The desire to be accepted by others is not arrogance in the slightest. If anything, arrogance is the opposite, the belief that you're perfect and don't need to change anything because others and what they think don't matter. Arrogance takes confidence and adds that "lack of conscience," sociopathic element. I didn't claim to know anything about you. I said that I hope you don't face any kind of mental trauma only to have people tell you what you feel is trivial and unimportant, as you're doing with transgender people. We should all be concerned with human suffering in whatever form it takes. If you aren't, then fine, I can't make you. But you'll get what you give in life. Personally, I've suffered extreme physical and mental anguish in my life; one is not worse than the other, they can both be absolutely crippling. Would I have had it "easier" if I was transgender? I can't say, but nobody can, and that's the point. You're trying to minimize a mental trauma you know nothing about. It's like people telling victims of depression to just "get over it" without understanding a lick about depression works biologically. I don't know how you can say that the brain is an organ, but that people who are suffering because something's "wrong" in that organ should just "get over it," as if we all have the ability to fix things that go wrong with our brains. Might as well as tell gunshot victims to "get over it." What we, as a society, really need to get over is this delusion that the brain is fundamentally different than the body, that we can fix anything mental as long as we're strong enough. That's a big, fat lie and a big reason why mental healthcare in the US is so appalling. Common sense and rationality are best to work both hand in hand. One needs to be rational thinking in the first place, in order to employ common sense.
No one can know all the relevant research and even if they think they are researching sources from recommendations, it could be a bumsteer. It is still all knowledge and with science, and what we are discussing here, much can still be conjecture.
I disagree. I don't do sympathy well, it is falling into a trap of pity and 'victimhood' and sometimes it might not help the receiver. If that makes me a sociopath with no conscience, then so be it, because I know that is not true. It is the semantic thing again, if words are that important, but empathy falls more into the realm of compassionate mind. One can see the issue and even cause and take appropriate steps of care, but doesn't take it on board and is capable of stepping away from, without taking it all on. Do you think professional and skilled psychiatrists and doctors are being sympathetic, when they are consulting, analyzing and operating. What good does sympathy do to help?
Human suffering that is born of mind games, is not the same of human suffering born out of realness of physical deformity. Whatever a transgendered person is going through, is not the worst of what can happen to somebody. It does not move me at all. I accept and acknowledge their need to identify as they feel and choose and request. I cannot under any circumstance, be expected to understand what is going on with their own psychology of mind. Take them to a children's cancer ward, and perhaps they just might start to put things into more perspective. People have to fight for their own sanity of mind and "self" image IS one of the biggest issues we have. What is there to worry about self-image, as opposed to somebody who has been badly burned and scarred in a horrendous accident, or somebody who has lost the use of a limb or organ. To me, TG issues are minimal, compared to bigger picture. Depression also works in with what I have just mentioned about putting things into perspective and I speak from experience.
I simply disagree that one needs to be rational in order to employ common sense. There's no rationality involved in not walking off a cliff; evolution has just programmed us to be wary of heights for our survival. Any animal not accustomed to heights will be wary in such situations, and most animals aren't rational, they're instinctual. I think you're confusing sympathy with excuse. They're very different things. I have sympathy (really more empathy) for the suffering my mother is enduring with her health, but I don't excuse her behavior I feel has lead to that suffering (poor diet, smoking, no exercise, etc.). In fact, I constantly remind her that if she wants to get healthy she needs to make radical changes in her life. That doesn't mean I don't sympathize/empathize with how she feels as I've dealt with physical suffering myself, and I know it's not easy to change. But sympathy/empathy =|= excuse. However, there are situations where sympathy/empathy leads to a more robust understanding of the full situation and we realize that people are not at fault for feeling how they do. I don't support victimhood mentality, but some people are, indeed, genuinely victims and have every right and reason to feel how they feel. That, in itself, doesn't necessarily endorse any course of action by itself, but it's part of what we should consider when considering what action to take or endorse. I simply fundamentally disagree with your last paragraph. The mind is as real as the body, and mental suffering is/can be every bit the equal of physical suffering. Only someone who's been through both, as I have, can realize this though. To suggest otherwise when you haven't been through either, or at least not extreme forms of either, is pure ignorance. Also, playing games of "who has it worse" is pretty silly, and also pretty irrelevant. It assumes that we don't have the mental capacity to care about all forms of suffering, and why don't we? What is it asking of either of us? Transgender people are asking for nothing other than that we allow them to live the life they want how they want without judgment. How is giving that to them taking away our focus on any other issues? How is "I care more about cancer patients than transgender people" even work practically? Maybe if you're donating time or money then, sure, pick whichever causes you feel are most relevant; but sympathy requires neither. If we're going to go super big picture, then all human suffering is "minimal" compared to the time and physical scale of the universe. We (and our suffering) is just a blip in time and space.
|
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Feb 14, 2020 18:12:42 GMT
I've had lots of jobs in my life. The best boss I ever had was a woman. And she was nothing like that chick. I think woman GENERALLY are better suited for management positions than men. Men want to be bosses. Their mantra is "Do what I say. I don't pay you to think. I don't care what you think. Do what I say or quit. Or you will be fired." Women GENERALLY care about their subordinates. And treat them with respect. They want to manage. Not boss. Those are general statements. Everybody is different. I think it depends on the quality and professionalism of the person and not what is between their legs. I have had both male and female bosses. Where I work at present, is largely female dominated, but that is only a sub-sector of a bigger whole. Previous jobs, the corporate management appeared to be dominated by arrogant and douchy white males, but this was over 10yrs ago.
I just think females can be more sentimental than males and that might not always be the best trait either, especially if a job needs to get done and males do tend to have a different dynamic and energy when working together, than females would. In some instances I do see women looking out for other women, as I have also seen men looking out for own brethren. That is just the nature of the gender beast. Thing is, I feel some women want to change men into being like them, as though it will make it easier for them to understand, or even control them.
I think that sentimentality is what makes them better managers. Their subordinates feel their female bosses really care about them. And don't just treat them as despendible tools. |
|
