Comments for Virginia Ruth

Comment on the buzz by Emily

Emily — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:08:06 +0000

I love kids. I love them. I love them. I love them. All it takes is showing the least amount of interest, and they’re your friends. And you can cuddle and hold hands and rough house and interact PHYSICALLY! People need affectionate touch. I need a lot of it. But for some terrible reason, most of the “West” has decided that physical affection is necessarily sexual affection. Grrr! There are three little boys here – not sure who they belong to – and we’re quickly becoming fast friends. They follow me around in the morning and at night when I’m not working, and they’re pretty fantastic.

I’m so happy about your job!

Comment on the buzz by Justin

Justin — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 18:22:35 +0000

Of course, male-directed bigotry is relatively minor and less restrictive than sexism in the other direction, but it’s nice to hear it acknowledged. And feminism might do well for itself if it acknowledged it more readily. In college I worked at a domestic violence shelter where part of my job was to develop male allies for the shelter’s domestic violence and sexual assault awareness campaigns. A major hurdle was men with the attitude that nobody was doing anything about the sexism they experience, so why should they do anything about the sexism women experience. On top of that, the assumption of these campaigns was that women were the victims and men were the perpetrators. Certainly that is most often the case, but it’s a counterproductive generalization and a painful one if you’re a male victim. Instead of treating the problem as a human one that is underpinned by gender constructs, it was being treated as a problem for women caused by men – thereby exacerbating those gender constructs. If people assume you’re violent, you’re more likely to be violent.

I mean maybe. I don’t know.

Comment on the buzz by Virginia Ruth

Virginia Ruth — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 19:14:41 +0000

Too bad, indeed. And if you think it’s hard to be a nurturing, giving dude, wait till you try being a nurturing, giving dude who wants to spend more time with kids. There’s not a lot of talk about male-directed sexism these days, but if you pay even a smidge of attention you’ll see very quickly that there’s a deep-rooted cultural assumption that views every man as a potential predator. It sucks.

I’m okay with evolutionary psychology and game theory, as far as they go — and in fact, I think they’re quite useful in their ability to explain how something can be both rational and crazy.

The connecting thoughts I want to put in this comment might just turn into another post.

Comment on the buzz by Justin

Justin — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 20:16:23 +0000

“We are naturally skeptical of any stranger who wants to give too much to us.”

Isn’t that crazy! I mean, I’m sure evolutionary psychologists and game theorists find it perfectly ‘rational’ in there reductive conception of humanity. But it’s crazy.

And there are particular cultural burdens that go along with this when you’re a dude. Women will often assume you’re hitting on them; other guys will often think less of you for acting effeminate.

I need to spend more time with kids. Too bad kids don’t hire programmers.

Comment on love and teddy bears by the buzz – Virginia Ruth

the buzz – Virginia Ruth — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:34:30 +0000

[...] though, one of the biggest things I appreciate about children is how receptive they are to love. I’ve talked about that feeling I sometimes have, of feeling like I’m overflowing with love and have [...]

Comment on blargh by Molly

Molly — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 16:30:45 +0000

Very interesting! In my life, this scene would have been different. I would have overslept, woke up in a panic, run around desperately to get dressed and out the door, and would have forgotten to put on earrings after reminding myself three times. Then throughout the day I would feel my earlobes and wish there were earrings there. Good for you for remaining in control of the situation. Enjoy your bad mood!

Comment on to Paris by Virginia Ruth

Virginia Ruth — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 07:11:13 +0000

Heh, sorry. Yeah. Maturity pretty much never makes for good poetry. Occasionally you can write a good novel about mature people (Middlemarch being my favorite example), but never poetry.

Seeing the play definitely came pat to the psychological moment for me this time around, and birthed this empathy for Paris. I expect it’s evident that I identify much more closely with him than with the star-crossed teenagers. And I’ve more or less made peace with the fact that my life will never form the center of a stage tragedy.

Comment on to Paris by Justin

Justin — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 01:09:35 +0000

Oh man. The play was depressing enough before you made me empathize with this guy.

Maturity doen’t make for good poetry. At least not in Shakespeare’s world. I imagine that’s why folks don’t usually pay attention to Paris.

Comment on reading Rorty by Virginia Ruth

Virginia Ruth — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 05:01:52 +0000

Well, but we can, can’t we? It just… takes longer. And the results are rarely exactly what we had in mind. But that’s what the best stories say about prayers and spells as well.

Comment on reading Rorty by Justin

Justin — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 17:35:28 +0000

I was mostly joking. It’s a beautiful and ancient idea though, isn’t it – the idea that we can effect things with our words, through prayer or spells or whatever.