Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!qantel!lll-lcc!lll-crg!gymble!umcp-cs!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccivax!rb
From: rb@ccivax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.singles,net.women
Subject: Re: Male Feminism (was: Why male dominance?)
Message-ID: <485@ccivax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 17-Mar-86 14:44:08 EST
Article-I.D.: ccivax.485
Posted: Mon Mar 17 14:44:08 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 22-Mar-86 01:55:29 EST
References: <1270@decwrl.DEC.COM> <439@ccivax.UUCP> <12@umcp-cs.UUCP> <459@ccivax.UUCP> <5776@kestrel.ARPA>
Reply-To: rb@ccivax.UUCP (What's in a name ?)
Organization: CCI Telephony Systems Group,  Rochester NY
Lines: 62
Xref: watmath net.singles:11070 net.women:9799
Summary: Win/Win considered effeminate

In article <5776@kestrel.ARPA> ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin) writes:
>In article <459@ccivax.UUCP>, rb@ccivax.UUCP (rex ballard) writes:
>> [...] most men, for whatever reason, tend to have a win/lose type of
>> aggression.  Simply put, for a man to feel he has won, he must feel that
>> the other person has lost.
>>
>> Women, although they may choose to "compete", have the option of developing
>> a win/win approach.  Simply put, a woman can feel she has "won" if
>> she gains benefit from the encounter even though the "opponant", if any,
>> may have also gained. 
>
>The win/win approach has been the cornerstone
>of professional diplomacy for many centuries. And the profession
>hasn't exactly been known for its lack of discrimination by gender.

Even though diplomacy begins with a win/win approach, frequently,
the end result has been one side or the other gaining a distinct advantage.
Often, "Teams" are built for the purpose of increasing pressure on opposite
side.  This is win/lose.

>It's interesting you work in a place where the men are win/lose
>problem-solvers, and the women are win/win. 
>I've never worked in a place like that.
>To me, the trait has appeared in people independent of gender.
>
>Peter Ladkin

I agree that this win/win strategy can be developed by men.  In fact,
it should be allowed to developed at a much earlier age than it does.
Those men who use this approach too early to the exclusion of win/lose,
are frequently considered effeminate(sp?).  In elementary school, boys
who aren't willing to fight or play with guns were considered "sissies"
(Derivation please?:-)).  In Jr. High they were considered "fairies".
In high school, they were simply written off as homosexuals (many were,
but not all).  Fortunately by college (perhaps because there was no draft
by the time I got there), it was acceptable to be non-competitive.  Even
then, there were competitions of "wits", but it was possible to win without
the "opponant" loosing.

In my college (a predominately female school) we were encouraged to
compete against ourselves rather than each other.  The object was to be
better today than you were yesterday.  Of course, the two predominate
programs were music-theater and nursing and 70% of the men at the school
openly admitted that they were homosexual.  Many of the heterosexual men
experienced profound personality changes during there stay in this school.
The sample was very small, less than 60 males in a school of 800 students,
only 18 heterosexual males.

Another interesting observation was that in the fencing course (one of the
few competitive courses), the women were initially more instintively defensive,
ie. able to deflect the thrust, and less counter-offensive (able to deflect
then counter thrust).  Later, the women became more effective at the
counter-offence, so much so that although some never initiated the
offense, they could win in the first deflect/counter.  During the final
"tournament", there were no male finalists (they had all lost in early
rounds).

This minature model of a "female dominated" society was one of the most
educational experiences of my life.  I don't claim to understand women
better because of it, but it did shatter many of my old sexist beliefs.
It also exposed me to several "feminine" characteristics which I found
to be quite admirable (and a few that weren't, but we won't get into that:-)).