Comments on: Boys club? https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/ Truth Will Prevail Mon, 06 Aug 2018 17:29:28 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.8 By: Anonymous https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-33262 Thu, 09 Dec 2004 09:38:18 +0000 /?p=150#comment-33262 Cheers!

]]>
By: Matt https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11151 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11151 I once read a summary of the academic research on gender-based learning difference. Many of the studies were trying to confirm or refute the conventional wisdom that men are naturally better at math and spatial thinking, and that women excel with words and emotive communicating.

In this article I learned that there was a huge gender-gap among philosophers and college philosophy majors.

I was therefore conscious of the fact that that the next philosophy course I attended (U of Utah) had only two women a room of 40 – 50 students. When I went to Harvard, I again noticed a striking shortage of women in a mid-level course I shopped on Kantian Ethics, though the course was taught by a woman.

I don’t remember the numbers on philosophy majors, but the gender imbalance among Mormons is presumably even more lopsided, given the church’s preference for traditional gender roles.

UP

]]>
By: Clark Goble https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11152 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11152 It’s not just philosophy. In physics we worked very hard to try and get women students but they were very rare. Mathematics was a little better, but not by much. Also the ones who tended to be in the classes were only getting minors. Of course the ones who did go for majors were great. (A friend of mine went to MIT)

I think that there is this weird “vibe” in Provo where women feel that they aren’t going to have a career, so why take a hard major? Learning for learning sake is definitely in the minority in some ways.

]]>
By: Gordon https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11153 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11153 Matt, that was hilarious! Actually, I wanted to say that my wife knows more about the Gospel than anyone I know. When I came home from work today, she told me that she had concluded her most recent quest: figuring out the significance of the phrase, “buffetings of Satan.” Unfortunately, she doesn’t like to write. So I will probably write something up on that for the blog and act like I thought of it.

]]>
By: Clark Goble https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11154 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11154 On the other hand I was reading an article on Foucalt which said that all the classes he taught as a grad-student were almost entirely women. Oddly, one of the major texts he used was the Marquis de Sade.

(For those not familiar with Foucalt, to say he had a rather depraved sexual life is understated. He wrote a lot on madness and sexuality. I’ve never understood why his philosophy classes in Sweden would have been so heavily attended by women.)

]]>
By: hugh https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11155 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11155 While we think, they work.

]]>
By: Kim https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11156 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11156 I think because women do not use computers as much for “communication”?

]]>
By: Russell Arben Fox https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11157 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11157 I just asked Melissa this question. Her answer, and take it for whatever it’s worth: Philosophy involves doubt. Women are more trusting. And if they do have questions or doubts about something, they are less interested than men are in trying to work them out on the issues’ own terms, since any answers they come up with will probably be beside the point anyway.

Jim, I was once at your house for a discussion, and Janice came it to ask you something, and after a little bit of banter you (or she; I don’t remember) said that you guys had a long standing deal: you never try to interest her in philosophy, and she never tries to get you to do any genealogy. Am I remembering this wrong? And if I’m not, why don’t you ask Janice this question? A woman with such strong opinions about Christmas trees probably has something to say about philosophy.

]]>
By: Dave https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11158 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11158 Well, I hate to state the obvious, but the reason women don’t participate in the discussion of LDS ideas in LDS forums (fora for the purists) is because this is a patriarchal church that excludes women from any meaningful role in leadership and brands bright, outspoken woman as “feminists.” [Note I didn’t say they are given no role in leadership, just no meaningful role.]

Personally, I think it is related to the prevalence in the Church of what I call “closet polygs,” men who really, really think their eternal destiny is to be awarded a few dozen wives in heaven and who pine for the days when they could practice the Principle in the flesh. That latent perspective on women underlies the “women as second class citizens” message that LDS culture and a good percentage of its leaders and priesthood holders radiate, and that works against participation by women in discussion or dialogue.

]]>
By: sid https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11159 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11159 Well, all good points , but, I just think one reason might be that women seem to be less interested in fooling around with computers and the net than men do. Plus, and i am making a vast generalisation here(since I am still in a singles ward), women seem to be more responsible, and be more interested in taking care of the important things in life and in the home, than spend time surfing the net, and pontificating on various topics on blogs and other internet fora, like some of us brethren are wont to do.
The other reason might be that there still are a lot of people, men and women, who are not yet familiar with the Blogosphere.
Just my 2 cents.
-Sid from Ann Arbor, Michigan

]]>
By: elliot https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11160 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11160 Why do intellectual mormon guys keep marrying unintellectual women? Don’t you ever long to have interesting, challenging philosophical discussions at home with your spouse, in addition to or as opposed to with guys in the blogosphere? I went to an ivy league law school full of incredibly intelligent women, and now I work with them at a top law firm. When you’re working with these high achieving women, don’t you ever wonder why you didn’t marry one, and raise your kids with her?

There are few professional female role models for young girls in the church. Women in the church have to make school and career compromises that intelligent, high-achieving women in mainstream society no longer have to make. The church is a tough place to be an intelligent woman for cultural as well as doctrinal reasons.

]]>
By: Kaimi https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11161 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11161 I wonder to what extent, if at all, it is related to the old Jewish tradition of the Torah-reading patriarch who sits at home and ponders on the mysteries of the scriptures, while his wife handles the chores of daily life. (For a modern, feminist critique of this practice, see, e.g., the novel Bread Givers. For an interesting spin on the idea, see Judge Posner’s description of his household as being similar to that tradition — i.e., he has never used an ATM — “Posner describes their relationship as the traditional Jewish one, in which the pasty-faced scholar husband stays home and studies while the wife attends to worldly activities.”) (See http://www.spriggs.com/news/pdfs/posner.pdf (link via Bashman’s 20 questions, at http://appellateblog.blogspot.com/2003_12_01_appellateblog_archive.html#107025480112696846 )

]]>
By: cooper https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11162 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11162 Well, well, well. I for one hope that Elliot isn’t married to a ditzy blonde trophy!

I am female, and yes, I have commented here. And yes, I do read with interest the posts. I am not one to post a comment until I have worked at it in my mind for some time. I did post that I liked the “mormon studies”/books section and hoped it would continue.

I have been referred to by women at church as an intellectual. I don’t find “church” to be a feminist suppression mechanism. What I find is a lack of time for many people to do anything but what is in their direct view currently. Itellectualism is a choice.

It is unfortunate many people don’t have time for study and learning. It is the only thing they’ll take with them when they leave the planet.

And another comment to elliot – better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, then to open yours and remove all doubt.

It’s not a gender war! It’s a stupidity war!

]]>
By: Gordon https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11163 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11163 Note to cooper: I was really intrigued by this thought: “I am not one to post a comment until I have worked at it in my mind for some time.” Although I am a professor, I don’t have much training in educational theory; nevertheless, those who have studied such things tell me that women tend to be slower than men in offering contributions in a classroom setting. It’s not that they don’t have things to say, but that they like to work things out first, rather than “on the fly.” Generally speaking, I do not like generalizations of this sort. ;-) But my experience in the classroom has been that women will participate more if I don’t just call on the first male hand. I am not sure whether that is relevant to blog comments (maybe we should go back to older comments; would we find a bunch of women talking about last week’s topics?), but I hope that you keep reading and posting.

]]>
By: Brent https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2003/12/boys-club/#comment-11164 Mon, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 /?p=150#comment-11164 Dave,

I don’t think what you stated is as “obvious” as you might think. Leadership roles do not create doctrinal masters or religious philosophers. Nor, from my experience in the church a number of different states, at BYU, on my mission, etc., does there appear to be any prevalence of men longing for polygamy. As a matter of fact, I can only think of one person in my life who I have met who might meet your description. We always want to attribute the differences between men and women to external social factors (to the environment), but the reality is that men and women are different, they come with different “wiring” if you will. That is not to say that all women and all men are exactly the same, but certain observable distinct characteristics exist. I also do not believe there is any latent perspective within the church that relegates women to status as second class citizens. I would argue instead that the exact opposite is true.

]]>