I've heard this policy.
Being female, it makes me relieved, sad, cross or amused depending on who says it.
Weaker vessel and all that is normally the argument that comes from Christians (Xns, that is, who aren't complete red-necks). I think this is kind of okay (kind of) because it's tapping into something... but.
I think it's right that we alter our method of discussion based on who the other person is. But I don't think this should be done solely along gender lines. Instead, I think we need to consider the power balance between us and the other person. For example, in certain relationships, because of my personality, my life experience, my role, my education and my knowledge, I will hold the power. The other person may or may not realise this. I need to be careful not to tread on such a person while I'm discussing/arguing a point with them. In other cases, I'll be the weaker partner and will appreciate the other person being gentle with me.
I had a situation last year when a senior, high profile minister and theologian criticised the lyrics of one of my songs. He wrote a reasonably forceful letter asking us to do a rewrite. I cowered. He was wrong, but I didn't want to argue with him. The power imbalance was too great. I wanted the guys to deal with it for me.*
But if it had been a 25 year old guy, I'd have taken him on and delighted in it! In fact, I'd have needed to be the one being gentle. It would be highly likely I'd be more confident, knowledgable, theologically educated and connected than him. It would amuse me greatly if he wouldn't argue with me based on my gender.
What do you think?
I do understand the sentiment of 'I don't argue with women' (kind of). On the whole, women are much more likely to be offended by a rigorous discussion. And I, myself, am usually more gentle arguing with women than with men.
But where's the fun in life if no one will argue with me?
Andrew and I are heading off to have a good argument together over lunch.
[ps. any guy who says anything negative about this post in the comments, agrees with me.]
* They wouldn't. They showed their support of me by making me write the letter.
What was the lyric?
ReplyDeletenever alone
ReplyDeleteOne of my favourite songs.
ReplyDeleteYou know. I almost did my M.Div project on the idea of deus absconditus, God hidden. I was intrigued by your line about God departing. Then I was thinking about doing it on the whole torn veil thing because I reckon we read stuff into that event that is speculative at best. I didn't do the project on either of those in the end. (I did it on something close - immanence and transcendence) But I love that song.
Doesn't the ENTP profile state that you love playing devil's advocate?
ReplyDeleteI've noticed, though, that being a girl does have some implications - sometimes the fact that you are a girl means that your clever retort hurts a guy unintentionally. And this isn't just relevant in the context of youth/singleness/romance/roses - I'm far more prone to burst into tears if a male family member puts me in my place than if a female relative does so. I suppose this is another aspect of power balance.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to letting the guys fight the battles for you, I don't think you can have it both ways. I can either keep my mouth shut and call in help only when it comes to unprovoked attacks, or I can say something and take responsibility for it.
But that's in the context of arguments, which I usually associate with anger, bitterness and unkindness. I see rigorous discussion as different - happening in the context of love, respect and cheerfulness. :)
And interestingly, that verse is about husbands and wives...how far does it apply?
ReplyDeleteI remember once bursting into tears when confronting my youth minister (as a bible study leader) about a difficult issue. He was a single guy in his thirties.
ReplyDeleteOh, how the power balance shifted after those tears...
(not that I recommend crying to get your way!)
All I want to know is, is this the 5 minute argument or the full half hour?
ReplyDelete;-)
beyond!
ReplyDeleteNever mind that it's talking generally and (arguably only) applicable to physical strength, not intellect - I say generally because there are marriages where the wife is physically stronger than her husband.
ReplyDeleteIt's very patronising - it's saying that your intellect and therefore argument is weaker because it comes from a brain with a bit more DNA.
I occasionally get similar responses in the world of engineering though fortunately this attitude is dying out.