|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:33 PM October 31st, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
...I thought "girls just wanna have fun"! :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:32 PM October 31st, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
This study is a thinly disguised rehash and rip-off of Rachel Simmon's excellent 2002 book - ODD GIRL OUT: THE HIDDEN CULTURE OF AGGRESSION IN GIRLS.
"There is a hidden culture of girls' aggression in which bullying is epidemic, distinctive, and destructive. It is not marked by the direct physical and verbal behavior that is primarily the province of boys. Our culture refuses girls access to open conflict, and it forces their aggression into nonphysical, indirect, and covert forms. Girls use backbiting, exclusion, rumors, name-calling, and manipulation to inflict psychological pain on targeted victims. Unlike boys, who tend to bully acquaintances or strangers, girls frequently attack within tightly knit networks of friends, making aggression harder to identify and intensifying the damage to the victims." (pg. 3 / intro.)
It's interesting that the author of the study cited above is essentially proposing a bizarre version of the "battered woman's defense" for adolescent girls, i.e. -- girls'aggression is "actually" defensive in nature, because they want to preserve their friendship networks, i.e. her personal "posse."
Simmons does a far more credible job of examining and dismantling the "sugar 'n spice, fairer sex" mythology, though she still wants to use "culture" (maybe "patriarchy?") as a potential abilbi for female violence.
Her comment that "Our culture refuses girls access to open conflict..." is refuted by all the recent statistics about female criminal violence, which is increasing at a far greater rate than male criminality.
Although most of the increase in female crime has to do with the war on drugs where women tend to be accomplices; women seem to be excelling at fraud, theft, and assault.
(roy)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by AngryMan
(end_misandryNOSPAM@yahoo.co.uk)
on 10:05 AM November 1st, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Another excellent book on the subject is "Queen Bees and Wannabes" by Rosalind Wiseman (Piatkus, 2003).
This excuse "Our culture refuses girls access to open conflict" is another strategy to exhonerate females from any responsibility for their actions - 'It's not her fault, the evil patriarchy made her do it'
The reason females go in for this kind of covert psycho-social harassment is because they are good at it, they enjoy it, it works, and it is very difficult to detect, so it is easy for them to cover their tracks and maintain an outward veneer of innocence.
Females tend to be more socially focused than men, and these social skills can be used to evil ends as well as good ones.
Girls do not bully because they want to be loved. They bully for exactly the same reasons boys do; to acquire power and status. It is sociopathic behaviour - the ruthless pursuit of naked self-interest at others' expense, nothing more.
Girl bullying is used to manufacture an in-group and an out-group, thus drawing the group closer together, with the bully as its leader. That doesn't mean she wants to be loved; she may want to be feared. The bottom line is, she wants power and control over others.
The techniques used by females are often subtle and clever. Vicious gossip, rumour-mongering, verbal abuse, destruction of reputation, and recruitment of proxy attackers are some of the main ones. False accusations of rape and child abuse are merely an extreme expression of a much more widespread behaviour pattern. Denying contact with one's children is another useful technique for inflicting long-term emotional torture.
In addition, creating different social rules for different individuals is an important strategy; judging each individual's behaviour by different standards. Thus, female group behaviour is fundamentally anti-democratic, and every bit as hierarchical as men's, if not more so.
Another strategy used is mystification; Manufacturing impossible, no-win situations for other people, through the creation of double standards.
In that feminist tract 'The Rules' the authors explicitly state that a man must never be able to understand all of the rules, and if he ever does, they must be changed immediately (Note that women have the power to make and modify the rules at will). The idea is to keep men permanently confused, never knowing what they are supposed to do.
A key element of being able to cover their tracks is the social expectation that 'girls just don't do things like that'. This is why feminists have never bothered to challange this particular traditional sexist view; women BENEFIT from it.
And men help the process by keeping their brains inside their shorts.
The Personal is Political, as feminists like to say (although it is in fact a saying of Mao Tse Tung's originally). This applies to men too. If you have a wife or partner, start observing her and her girlfriends. Understand the group dynamics. Who is the Queen Bee? Who in your social group actually makes and enforces the rules, men or women? Whose agenda is being followed?
"Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants." Louis D Brandeis, Supreme Court Justice, 1913
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:40 PM November 1st, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
angryman -- excellent post, worthy of widespread quoting.
"Whose agenda is being followed?"
That is a very dangerous question for any man to ask honestly.
Of his first date, his second date, his girlfriend, his fiancee, his wife, his girlfriend, his mistress, his ex-wife, his ex-mistress, his next girlfriend, wife, mistress, ex-wife etc. etc. (and on and on...)
(roy)
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Anonymous User writes "Here's a