What is this an exercise is deflection?

Posted by Vanilla,
"Actually, when Doris Lessing won the Nobel Prize for Literature last year she had much that was unflattering to say about women and much that was flattering to say about men."

Saying 'unflattering things' about one sex is completely different from making a blanket negative assessment of a fundamental quality like intelligence about one sex, particularly with the apparently accepted remark "as we all know" added.

"Doris Lessing: "It is time we began to ask who are these women who continually rubbish men."

That was about women rubbishing men - my example was about men rubbishing men - why is everyone avoiding the actual issue I raise?

"I doubt Peter Doherty meant to make a serious, definitive statement about the relative intelligence of men and women."

His formulation was serious and definitive and such 'doubts' are extremely rare when men make blanket demeaning statements about women.

"Some women find men more intelligent that women. (Camille Paglia comes to mind — she has said so publicly many times.)"

If that is true than she is also sexist - sexual discrimination is discrimination on the basis of sex - it cant be that hard to understand can it?

"If you want to feel victimised because of you gender, whether you're a man or a woman, it isn't hard to find evidence. But why go out of your way to feel offended?"

I didnt go out of my way - I was just watching Catalyst. Is the whole of feminism then - people going out of their way to feel offended?

"This kind of "he said, she said" bickering doesn't interest me, nor do I think it helps anyone much."

There was no "he said, she said" situation - there was no 'she' in it. This is all misrepresentation and off-topic. I have to wonder if it is deliberate 'smokescreening', or is everyone really just 'too simple' to understand the situation I describe - deeply respected men are producing anti-male sexist comments and virtually no-one sees a problem.

Posted by Foxy,

"Lighten up... I did not mean my comments to be an attack on your
'manhood' "

Personal criticism
still nothing on topic and
'Manhood' was never an issue raised
- more smoke and mirrors

"I won't make any more 'sexist' remarks like :
"Men only call themselves 'feminists' in the hope of getting a more intelligent root.""

You never made a sexist comment like that
that one has humour.

Dear Rob,

I think that you are reading too much into Peter Doherty's remarks.
Perhaps he was simply wanting to pay women a compliment. Why do you have to label his remark as 'sexist?'

I get the feeling that you may be bringing a few of your own personal issues into all of this. As you stated the most vengeful creatures that you've ever known have been women. Do you think that this fact may have somewhat tainted your perception of things?

I think that perhaps you're making this situation more complicated than it needs to be. Intelligence is something that can only be measured on an individual basis anyway - so Doherty's comment is not all that controversial really - it a non-issue.

Surely you can see it?

You're spot on, Rob, but the women will continue to deflect and deny, because it's uncomfortable for them to acknowledge the truth of what you're pointing out.

The fact is that Peter Doherty recognises that it is in his career interest to make the appropriate feminist noises. Any hint of non-conformist views could jeopardise the next round of public funding, not to mention all sorts of vilification from the media hacks who've ridden the wave of academic feminist preferment and call themselves "journalists". Not an especially brave position, but pragmatic, which is precisely why it has become entrenched among men who have to rely on the goodwill of powerful women.

Okay.

I'm sorry that you feel my first post diverted the conversation. I honestly simply meant to point out that another Nobel Prize winner had made not entirely dissimilar comments — I didn't mean to claim it was an exact parallel.

I do believe, as I said in my first post, that gender issues are best discussed without ideology or rancour.

As for being "too simple," I'm pretty sure I'm not, but another poster did suggest I was "ignorant" recently. Either way, you may have to put up with it — OLO hasn't yet found a way to exclude der-brains like me from public conversations.

To be honest, I'm surprised you think the man's comments were "serious and definitive". I just watched the segment — it's here: http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2218872.htm and it would be great to get other people's take on it — and it seems to me that he was attempting to describe his own personality rather than make generalisations about the world.

If a woman said what he said (with the genders reversed) I wouldn't be in the least offended. I might think she was a bit of a doormat, but that's her lookout.

By the way, what Camille Paglia said was, "There is no female Mozart because there is no female Jack the Ripper." She was referring to the fact that some researchers have found that, biologically, men sit more at the extremes of intelligence than women, who are more likely to be clustered around the median. It's a fascinating idea and expanded on in this book: http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Sexual-Paradox/Susan-Pinker/e/9780743284707#TABS

I'm not saying it's right or wrong — I haven't read it yet — but it intrigues me.

Anyway. Personally, I don't believe it's particularly useful to cry "Sexist!" every time someone expresses a preference for one gender over another, or suggests there are differences between the genders, or says one gender is smarter/stronger/better than the other. If we do, culture just becomes ridiculously politically correct, and everyone is afraid to say what they really mean.

But if you are still outraged, why don't you complain to the ABC?

Australia is decades away from having an adult, sensible debate about gender relations.

At the moment, it's acceptable to humiliate and insult men, portray them as thugs and morons, and never give them the benefit of the doubt - things women don't tolerate in 2008. However, it's not terribly widespread, and nothing like the patriarchal domination which was the model for society until just seventy years ago. Unfortunately, the moment this crops up as a topic, any sensible argument is drowned out by angry misogynists and misandrists who hold the other sex responsible for a personal abuse, abandonment, or the actions of the Family Court.

Still, it's nice to see some people trying.