Battle of the Sexes or the Battle Against Myself

Zack sent this to me a few weeks ago and as always- I adore any sort of research/commentary on relationships/gender/birth order. Psychology was my second choice of professions after the arts. I just copied the intro down...

http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm

Is There Anything Good About Men?
Roy F. Baumeister
http://www.denisdutton.com/
This invited address was given at a meeting the American Psychological Association in San Francisco on August 24, 2007. The thinking it represents is part of a long-range project to understand human action and the relation of culture to behavior. Further information about Prof. Baumeister and his research can be found at the foot of this page. — D.D.


"You’re probably thinking that a talk called “Is there anything good about men” will be a short talk! Recent writings have not had much good to say about men. Titles like Men Are Not Cost Effective speak for themselves. Maureen Dowd’s book was called Are Men Necessary? and although she never gave an explicit answer, anyone reading the book knows her answer was no. Louann Brizendine’s book, The Female Brain, introduces itself by saying, “Men, get ready to experience brain envy.” Imagine a book advertising itself by saying that women will soon be envying the superior male brain!
Nor are these isolated examples. Alice Eagly’s research has compiled mountains of data on the stereotypes people have about men and women, which the researchers summarized as “The WAW effect.” WAW stands for “Women Are Wonderful.” Both men and women hold much more favorable views of women than of men. Almost everybody likes women better than men. I certainly do.
My purpose in this talk is not to try to balance this out by praising men, though along the way I will have various positive things to say about both genders. The question of whether there’s anything good about men is only my point of departure. The tentative title of the book I’m writing is “How culture exploits men,” but even that for me is the lead-in to grand questions about how culture shapes action. In that context, what’s good about men means what men are good for, from the perspective of the system.
Hence this is not about the “battle of the sexes,” and in fact I think one unfortunate legacy of feminism has been the idea that men and women are basically enemies. I shall suggest, instead, that most often men and women have been partners, supporting each other rather than exploiting or manipulating each other.
Nor is this about trying to argue that men should be regarded as victims. I detest the whole idea of competing to be victims. And I’m certainly not denying that culture has exploited women. But rather than seeing culture as patriarchy, which is to say a conspiracy by men to exploit women, I think it’s more accurate to understand culture (e.g., a country, a religion) as an abstract system that competes against rival systems — and that uses both men and women, often in different ways, to advance its cause.
Also I think it’s best to avoid value judgments as much as possible. They have made discussion of gender politics very difficult and sensitive, thereby warping the play of ideas. I have no conclusions to present about what’s good or bad or how the world should change. In fact my own theory is built around tradeoffs, so that whenever there is something good it is tied to something else that is bad, and they balance out.
I don’t want to be on anybody’s side. Gender warriors please go home."

I think this article entertains me because I have been told on more than one occasion that some of my comments could set women's rights back about a century. To be honest, when girls go all feminist- I get rather annoyed. You can do anything you want to in life as long as you actually go for it and try rather than sit around and bitch about how unfair things are. I definitely don't think that women should be made to stay at home and take care of the kids if you don't want to, but there is something to be said for a traditional family setup. If you want a career and a full social calendar, maybe you don't have time for kids. If you aren't going to actually take the time to raise them, then honestly, why are you bothering?
I'm from a traditional setup which I suppose makes many argue with me over points like these. Maybe I would have come out just fine from daycare. All I do know is that my parents have Never missed a single concert, sporting event, ceremony for myself of any of my siblings. (except for one tournament in Florida- they would have gone but my sister insisted they not take off to drive down there.) As a result, I've always known my parents had my back no matter what. Were there consquences for this type of upbringing? Of course there were- I grew up poor. Even that isn't such a terrible thing though. I think my siblings and I have really great work ethic and actually know the value of a lot of things in life.

Hm, I actually just got myself way off topic because what I was actually going to write about what male/female social structures. This article talks a bit about women having fewer close friendships while males have a wider yet shallower social circle. That's probably pretty true for most guys that I've ever met. I guess what I was sort of pondering is how much my comfort level impacts my ability to be social and outgoing. As long as I have a few good friends around, or if I go to an event with someone with whom I feel secure with, than I have no problems introducing myself to whoever happens to be in a room. I usually only start to falter when I feel like I have no backup support.
I think this is probably partly why Michael and I socialized really badly together. I knew that when we went places together, I would be almost entirely on my own. Knowing that ahead of time made me nervous and edgy and probably not my most adorable, typically friendly self.

The adjustment to NYC hasn't been bad for me because I have two really close friends here that I know are always there to talk to. My social survival is not based off of my ability to perform, make new friends, or charm the world. Although- I do try to do that as much as possible;)

*note to self. do not blog at work because i get really disjointed and rambly.

Random Fact for the Day

1) I have no idea why i signed up for twitter when i already update my gmail status 20 times a day. opening another window is just too complicated.

2) Fantastic weekend! Bekah was here! Hung out with Sean and co. Went to a bbq and met new people. Gorgeous weather:)

3) Just realized I actually used to bring home more money when I lived in florida. I am destined to be poor. Well, that's not true... maybe just destined for a life without a savings account.

4) Flying to North Carolina tomorrow!

5) I really like lists.

Stuff That is Awesome

in no particular order...

1) The BFF is coming this weekend to celebrate our 20 year friendship anniversary!

2) Just got back from a weekend in LA and SF for work and experienced my first earthquake.  I know earthquakes are actually kind of bad...  but it was rather exciting.

3) Josh's wedding is next weekend.  Hurray for hanging out with the family on the beach!

4) Seven weeks in and I still LOVE my job.

5) My back is feeling pretty good most of the time.

6) Kurt and I just had Yogurtland soft serve today- they charge by the pound.  amazing.

7) I only have a three day work week this week and 2 days next week:)

Good Enough.

It entertains me to no end that Kurt and I sit next to each other on our highly uncomfortable couch each with our macs. Well, Kurt actually has two macs out right now... if we were fighting some sort of computer battle, he would definitely win.

Do to popular request, I have decided to share one of my pearls of wisdom of successful making out. Just to clarify, sitting around making such lists is not something I typically do... except when I have a broken back and have to sit at home for three months... believe me, you'd start doing all kinds of kooky things too.

#5 Choose carefully when dealing with a pack of hot men. You must pick one. Making out with more than one guy from the same group is just bad for business. We're not in undergrad anymore, so make sure you pick right the first time.

On to more serious things... sort of. One article that I've read in the past few months that really fascinated me was this: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200803/single-marry.

Amusingly enough, this article was actually sent to me by my ex-boyfriend. Basically, the author of this talks about how we often idealize what another person is capable of providing for us. I've been thinking a lot over the past year about what I want both out of my own life and what I want from someone else. I think it's important to know what your 'truths' are and stick to those, but you can be flexible on many things in your life. Americans are too idealistic and while I don't intend to ever 'settle' for someone- I think I do recognize that another person probably won't fulfill everything. That's why you have family and friends and hobbies.

I obviously don't have it all figured out but these are what I know my truths are so far....

1) Love of travel and new things. I like adventures, and it's probably important to be with someone who thinks that spending money and time on crazy endeavors is a good idea.

This sort of goes along with it... but a natural curiosity about the world is good too. I don't think I'll ever raise alpacas... but I hope whomever I'm with at least finds it amusing.

2) Belief in a higher power. I'm not sure what this means yet. I don't know... I'm just not a fan of the title Christian anymore although I would use it to describe myself. I don't like the way Christianity has become a closed social club, and so many people seem to forget that we were asked to love one another, not to judge. My philosophy can be summed up by 'penguin sex.' But that's a whole other post in itself.

3) Motivated, driven, dedicated to bettering oneself through education, job, or some sort of hobby/passion. Being a slacker is probably my number one turnoff.

4) Outgoing. I want to be with someone who I could leave with a group of people they've just met (and also isn't afraid of my family.)

5) I am staying in the northeast. or maybe moving to another country. Unless someone provides me with really really excellent reasons for going elsewhere- and the funding to fly home and visit a lot.

I know there's lots more... but that's it for now!

*side note... I read this paragraph in the book Eat, Pray, Love and it made me think of a certain someone. I think it accurately describes what our relationship was and also why it was so hard for me to let go of it.

"A true soul mate is a mirror, the person who shows you everything that’s holding you back, the person who brings you to your own attention so you can change your life. A true soul mate is probably the most important person you’ll ever meet, because they tear down your walls and smack you awake. But to live with a soul mate forever. Nah. Too painful. Soul mates, they come into your life just to reveal another layer of yourself to you, and then they leave. And thank God for it."

Week 14

The readings this week focus on what is Real in photography.  As photography continues to advance and evolve, we're assaulted by more and more technology that is capable of altering the photograph to the extent that it's next to impossible to tell if what is contained in the image has been altered or is even a photograph at all.

The image above was created by my friend Nick who is an architect.  They were supposed to take a photograph of the models they created for a class.  However, Nick is a crazy perfectionist and was unable create the lighting he wanted for his model, so decided to simply model it in 3D studio max instead.  I can't tell that it's an image that was created- rather than taken, and neither could anyone in his class.

The Remediation articles talked quite a bit about virtual reality.  "In order to create a sense of presence, virtual reality should come as close as possible to our daily visual experience"(p.22).  This statement interests me because when I think of VR, I don't think of it as employing technology to do everyday things such as doing the dishes or walking my dogs.  Instead, VR is often expected to show us things that are fantastical and that we cannot access in our everyday lives.  

This of course leads us to the photoblog in comparison.  "Photobloggers like, most of all, to make photographs of what they call 'the everyday', the 'banal' or 'the mundane'.... most photobloggers say that 'real life' is the desired content of their photographs.  They want pictures of real life as it happens, as they experience.  'Real life'... traditionally happens outside of photographs, and this is precisely what they want in their photographs" (p.887).  Digital pictures are free and therefore many many more images can be taken, providing the photographer with an arsenal of images with which to describe even the smallest moments of their days.  A desire is expressed for a camera to be inserted in their eyes so that it is possible to capture every detail of their existence.  Below are a few images from a friend's photoblog.

 I also found it interesting that the reading points out that most photobloggers do not use flash.  In general, they avoid any behavior or photographic tool that causes people to be put on guard or strike a pose.  They capture the moments before and after the instant when someone expects the photo to be taken.  

Modernism Rewind

I'm going to journey back in time to week 2 and refresh my own memory on modernism.

Beginning with Harrison- he defines modernism as "intentional rejection of classical precedent and classical style."  Modernism distinguishes between the classical and the transformation of art in the 19th-20th centuries through industrialization, urbanization, and mechanism (taken from Amy's blog- thanks!).  The artist in the modernist realm believes that the most important thing about art is it's aesthetics and rather than simply being a kind of artist- the modernist is a critic who has a certain set of beliefs about art and it's development.

In Greenberg's Modernist Painting, he states that modernism is "the use of characteristic methods of a discipline to criticize the discipline itself, not in order to subvert it but in order to entrench it more firmly in the area of competence."  Modernist photographers included members of f/64- a group that focused on highlighting the sharp detail in which a photograph can render it's subject- rather than making photographs that look like paintings.  Michael Fried- a follower of Greenberg in turn attacks minimalist art for producing effects that do not derive from within the work itself, but instead are dependent on the viewer's relationship with the object (Art and Objecthood, 1966). This, he insists, "is now the negation of art". According to Fried, these minimalists took Greenberg's plea for purity too far; instead of exploring medium, all they do is present the materials for what they are. 

Week 13

This week's readings focused on the writings of Michael Fried and the release of his new book, Why Photography Matters.  Fried identifies two modes of relation between figures in pictures and their spectators.  The first is the "absorptive mode" in which the subject figure of the work is absorbed in their own task and unaware of their surroundings and the presence of the viewers.  One such photography trend and example of this work involves our attachment and focus on our electronic devices.  Andrew Curtis created a series of work titled "Cell" in which the subjects are all focusing on their cell phones.

www.andrewcurtis.com

Another artist who uses this technique is Evan Baden and his series "Illuminati."  This project includes subjects on cell phones, waching tv, and playing video games.

www.evanbaden.com

Both of these series show figures who "appear not to be 'acting out' their world, only 'being in' it."  The subjects are so absorbed in their electronic devices that they seem to be completely unaware of the photographer.  

The second mode that Fried talks about is the "theatrical mode."  In this mode, the figure in the picture is performing for the viewer (and at the time the picture was made- the artist.)  While these two modes seem to be opposites, they are share in common that the act of the subject focusing on something in the image is a performance in itself.