Comment of the Week: Vaya con Dios, Bro!

photo by SteveMakesNoise

In response to last week’s “Your Call,” in which a reader admitted to getting caught — four times! — sending flirty texts to women other than his girlfriend, Slartibartfast had this to say. It’s not that deep, it just made us laugh! (Which we know is kind of mean, considering this repentant guy’s now-ex left with their kids, but what can we say, we’re horrible people):

You know the saying “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me four or more times, shame on me?” *Four* times? Really? And at no point in that series of flirtations, with your girlfriend registering her displeasure, did it occur to you that it might not be the kindest or smartest course of action?  No “Danger, Will Robinson!” moments? In that case, it’s hard to conclude anything other than her actions are justifiable. It’s also difficult to avoid the impression that you are idiotic, insensitive or both. My condolences to your ex. Vaya con Dios, bro.

Okay, okay, let’s end on a more thoughtful note. We really liked Dannie’s mention of the Gender Similarities Hypothesis (look it up) in her comment in response to her own Comment of the Week last week about the differences between men and women:

So men and women have a few differences.  Maybe collectively, maybe not.  Most of them, if not all, are probably socialized. People like to ignore the Gender Similarities Hypothesis, which is the result of 46 meta-analyses and 20 years of research.  That, to me, is more significant than any survey or any mythology related to us by our parents about the inherent differences between men and women.  Why are people not aware of it?  Because it is far simpler to put people into categories and address them that way than it is to deal with dynamic personalities.  Because it is fun to have an “us” and “them” sometimes.  Because we like to think we fit in to a group that follows similar patterns of behavior. The list goes one, but however realistic it is…

One Comment

  1. The Gender Similarities Hypothesis has loads of merit, but there are also considerable limitations. The studies looked at aggression across genders in video game play, not in the realm of mate selection or resource acquisition or anywhere else one might expect to see actual evolved differences.

    Clearly men and women are mostly similar psychologically (as well as physically, in terms of the global form and function of our bodies), but there are very specific differences both physically and psychologically between men and women.

    For some reason there’s a tendency for some people to minimize the psychological differences to the point where it can be said that they’re inconsequential. What brings this about? Of course there’s a desire for near-perfect equality as a concept, but just because it doesn’t exist exactly as we hope doesn’t mean that all differences are bad, or that it’s better to try to wish them away.

Comments are closed.