Comments on: The male gaze: I see it http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/08/19/the-male-gaze-i-see-it/ Life, Culture and Politics from BrisVegas Tue, 14 Feb 2012 08:56:52 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: David_H http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/08/19/the-male-gaze-i-see-it/#comment-141622 David_H Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:05:29 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9598#comment-141622 uh cough cough - <a href="http://www.qednet.biz/wordpress/2009/11/the-gender-balance-at-lp-a-question/" rel="nofollow">bump</a> uh cough cough – bump

]]> By: Paulus http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/08/19/the-male-gaze-i-see-it/#comment-141621 Paulus Tue, 01 Sep 2009 17:35:22 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9598#comment-141621 Naah, Helen, you just put the little buggers in the harness, and whip them hard enough, and you'll get them pulling the sled, no problem. Much easier than getting women on to the blokosphere, err, sorry, blogosphere! ;) Naah, Helen, you just put the little buggers in the harness, and whip them hard enough, and you’ll get them pulling the sled, no problem.

Much easier than getting women on to the blokosphere, err, sorry, blogosphere! ;)

]]> By: Helen http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/08/19/the-male-gaze-i-see-it/#comment-141620 Helen Tue, 01 Sep 2009 12:17:45 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9598#comment-141620 So, you think that women playing an equal part in the blogosphere would be like cats pulling sleds? because that's where the evpsych - essentialist argument always heads, isn't it? So, you think that women playing an equal part in the blogosphere would be like cats pulling sleds? because that’s where the evpsych – essentialist argument always heads, isn’t it?

]]> By: Adrien http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/08/19/the-male-gaze-i-see-it/#comment-141619 Adrien Tue, 01 Sep 2009 09:34:13 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9598#comment-141619 TT - <i>if I’ve misjudged where you were heading with the emphasis on “it’s a theory”, I apologise in advance.</i> . Yeah you did. I know what you mean. Like AGW is just a theory so we can ignore it by pretending 'just a theory' is like: it's only a story. Natural Selection makes perfect sense to me. . As I understand it a viable theory has evidence that backs it up but is not yet 100% proven beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt. It may be proved false finally or, more likely, superceded by a better theory which incorporates the earlier ones. . I mean the difference between the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and the General Theory of Relativity. Or evolution and natural selection. The first is a fact; the second an explanation that explains the fact, at least partially. TT – if I’ve misjudged where you were heading with the emphasis on “it’s a theory”, I apologise in advance.
.
Yeah you did. I know what you mean. Like AGW is just a theory so we can ignore it by pretending ‘just a theory’ is like: it’s only a story. Natural Selection makes perfect sense to me.
.
As I understand it a viable theory has evidence that backs it up but is not yet 100% proven beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt. It may be proved false finally or, more likely, superceded by a better theory which incorporates the earlier ones.
.
I mean the difference between the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and the General Theory of Relativity. Or evolution and natural selection. The first is a fact; the second an explanation that explains the fact, at least partially.

]]> By: su http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/08/19/the-male-gaze-i-see-it/#comment-141618 su Sun, 30 Aug 2009 09:10:08 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9598#comment-141618 <blockquote>There is a limit as to what can be done. You’ll never train cats to pull sleds for example.</blockquote> First, you build a giant roomba. Put technology in the mix and nature/nurture starts to get interesting.

There is a limit as to what can be done. You’ll never train cats to pull sleds for example.

First, you build a giant roomba. Put technology in the mix and nature/nurture starts to get interesting.

]]> By: tigtog http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/08/19/the-male-gaze-i-see-it/#comment-141617 tigtog Sun, 30 Aug 2009 07:50:45 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9598#comment-141617 <a href="http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/08/19/the-male-gaze-i-see-it/comment-page-6/#comment-823009" rel="nofollow">@ Adrien</a> Theories are models of observed phenomena (i.e. facts) which are used to predict future events/phenomena. So biological evolution has observations, data, mechanisms, hypotheses, facts, theories and predictions based on the theories. ETA: if I've misjudged where you were heading with the emphasis on "it's a theory", I apologise in advance. It just sounded way too like the <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html" rel="nofollow">"Just A Theory"</a> woo that makes my teeth grind. @ Adrien

Theories are models of observed phenomena (i.e. facts) which are used to predict future events/phenomena. So biological evolution has observations, data, mechanisms, hypotheses, facts, theories and predictions based on the theories.

ETA: if I’ve misjudged where you were heading with the emphasis on “it’s a theory”, I apologise in advance. It just sounded way too like the “Just A Theory” woo that makes my teeth grind.

]]> By: Adrien http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/08/19/the-male-gaze-i-see-it/#comment-141616 Adrien Sun, 30 Aug 2009 07:06:03 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9598#comment-141616 <i>Natural selection is just one mechanism for evolution BTW, there are others eg genetic ‘drift’.</i> . Insofar as I actually understand this stuff I thought they were theories. Natural selection is just one mechanism for evolution BTW, there are others eg genetic ‘drift’.
.
Insofar as I actually understand this stuff I thought they were theories.

]]> By: Adrien http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/08/19/the-male-gaze-i-see-it/#comment-141615 Adrien Sun, 30 Aug 2009 06:54:17 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9598#comment-141615 Su - Cheers. I'll read them tonight. . Fine - Good point. The picture of nature which I have is one of material that will fit its circumstances. The proposition that women are inherently less assertive due to natural make-up cannot be absolutely proved. And even if it was so I think perhaps that it could be defied. Caeser once commented, on the war with the Celts in France that the women were more dangerous then the men. Still true. :) _ <blockquote>So the Queen Boadicea, standing loftily charioted, Brandishing in her hand a dart and rolling glances lioness-like, Yell'd and shriek'd between her daughters in her fierce volubility. Till her people all around the royal chariot agitated,</blockquote> _ I suppose tho' that the construct on which gender is based - masculinity/femininity - must be redesigned. Obviously this is not a new idea. But I think perhaps there's a tendency to regard a human animal as a bank page upon which a culture writes. Whereas I think of it as an animal. . There is a limit as to what can be done. You'll never train cats to pull sleds for example. So the intention becomes not so much in creating a race of gender-homogenous androgynes but new ideas of femininity/masculinity which do not curtail the aspirations and opportunities of individuals insofar as that is possible at the present time. . There is however a difference and it will persist. At least imho. I could well be wrong. Su – Cheers. I’ll read them tonight.
.
Fine – Good point. The picture of nature which I have is one of material that will fit its circumstances. The proposition that women are inherently less assertive due to natural make-up cannot be absolutely proved. And even if it was so I think perhaps that it could be defied. Caeser once commented, on the war with the Celts in France that the women were more dangerous then the men. Still true. :)
_

So the Queen Boadicea, standing loftily charioted,
Brandishing in her hand a dart and rolling glances lioness-like,
Yell’d and shriek’d between her daughters in her fierce volubility.
Till her people all around the royal chariot agitated,

_

I suppose tho’ that the construct on which gender is based – masculinity/femininity – must be redesigned. Obviously this is not a new idea. But I think perhaps there’s a tendency to regard a human animal as a bank page upon which a culture writes. Whereas I think of it as an animal.
.
There is a limit as to what can be done. You’ll never train cats to pull sleds for example. So the intention becomes not so much in creating a race of gender-homogenous androgynes but new ideas of femininity/masculinity which do not curtail the aspirations and opportunities of individuals insofar as that is possible at the present time.
.
There is however a difference and it will persist. At least imho. I could well be wrong.

]]> By: su http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/08/19/the-male-gaze-i-see-it/#comment-141614 su Sun, 30 Aug 2009 06:48:38 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9598#comment-141614 Gahh formatting. The study was called "Recent acceleration of human adaptive evolution" by John Hawks,and a bunch of others. Two of the authors have written a book based on the results called "The 10,000 year explosion: How Civilization accelerated human evolution". Natural selection is just one mechanism for evolution BTW, there are others eg genetic 'drift'. Gahh formatting. The study was called “Recent acceleration of human
adaptive evolution” by John Hawks,and a bunch of others. Two of the authors have written a book based on the results called “The 10,000 year explosion: How Civilization accelerated human evolution”.

Natural selection is just one mechanism for evolution BTW, there are others eg genetic ‘drift’.

]]> By: su http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/08/19/the-male-gaze-i-see-it/#comment-141613 su Sun, 30 Aug 2009 06:34:11 +0000 http://larvatusprodeo.net/?p=9598#comment-141613 <blockquote>I am not arguing along this old left/right chestnut.</blockquote> I know, I meant a general "you" rather than you specifically. <blockquote>Would you please elucidate. How do we know that?</blockquote> See this <a>study</a> (pdf), results reported <a>here</a>.

I am not arguing along this old left/right chestnut.

I know, I meant a general “you” rather than you specifically.

Would you please elucidate. How do we know that?

See this study (pdf), results reported here.

]]>