Why canÕt girls be more like puppies?

candan · Post by **candan** » Wed Mar 27, 2002 2:03 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Sometimes children's play can appear overly aggressive, causing parents to worry that the child will grow up to
believe aggressive behavior and fighting are acceptable.

But pretending to be aggressive is not the same as being aggressive. Aggressive games such as rough and
tumble and pretend fighting with toy guns are all part and parcel of learning to understand and imitate the adult world.

Real fighting is something else altogether and should not be praised or encouraged. While adults may sometimes
confuse real and pretend fighting, research shows that children as young as five are able to tell the difference.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not fully on topic, but our "pups" are imitating and very likely preparing for the adult world. Some studies indicate that girls that are aggressive in play are rejected by their peers (not conforming to expected role), boys more accepted for their aggressive abilities.

My wife agrees with these findings as she herself was/is aggressive. She is in everyway a woman and yet can fight better then most men when under stress as I witnessed twice in 15 yrs...head butts.. forearms to neck..kicks to lower legs

(sorry guys but they are out there). NOTE: NO MA training

Dana Sheets · Post by **Dana Sheets** » Wed Mar 27, 2002 2:46 am

Candan,

Nice quote - where did you get it?

And just for the record - I never said women should be more like men. I'm bringing up the idea that the conventional definition of what a woman "should" be is limiting to what a woman can be.

Arrrrgh. That's vague and it doesn't express what I'm trying to get at. I celebrate the differences between women and men. Life would be very boring if we were all the same. I celebrate that there are differences within the range of womanhood and within the range of manhood.

But it keeps coming back to the idea that a woman who fights is less womanly. Why? I don't get it. If a mother were to fight off ANYONE male or female that was attacking her kids - people say "that's what a mother does - she defends her children at any cost."

So why in the world is it part of what is womanly for a woman to fight to defend her kids but not womanly for her to fight to defend herself?

JohnC · Post by **JohnC** » Wed Mar 27, 2002 3:56 am

Dana:

Hmmm... this seems like an area a man should take heed that ... angels fear to tread, but what the heck.

I think healthy, playful wrestling and tumbling is a common early childhood experience for boys and girls. But, there seems to be an unwritten rule about this having age limitations. You'll note that the girls who continue to lean into these activities until puberty or post puberty get labeled "tomboys".

The scramblers, tree-climbers, girls intrigued by and not frightened by nature's little critters, are viewed more as "buds" than as dating material.

Few girls seem inclined to follow this path. There is probably some media/social/cultural phenomenon going on here, but I don't want to get too far off. It seems that ladies with 5 brothers who wrestled through childhood, or were "tomboys" or something along these lines definitely seem more adept in the martial arts and self defense. They have a shorter way to go to get past these social governors and hesitations about getting into verbal and physical self defense.

Just a few thoughts.

JohnC
JohnC

Tony-San · Post by **Tony-San** » Wed Mar 27, 2002 5:04 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote

Sometimes you need to be a bitch to survive in a man's world.

I'll buy that... but to what extent? Do you sacrifice your womanhood to pursue your own self-serving goals in a mans world? How far do you go? Will you resort to backstabbing and betrayal? Deception? Remember Dana, that even though Men are hairy, smelly and sometimes mean... many of us out there still believe in Truth, Honesty, Integrity, Honor, Loyalty and Courage. These are all heartfull traits that cannot be replaced with anything else (such as bitchiness). If you really want to survive in a "Mans World", it would be worth taking the time to meditate and cultivate these traits in yourself. You can do this without sacrificing your womanhood and men will respect you (at least the ones that matter) for your heart rather then your kotickitai.

candan · Post by **candan** » Wed Mar 27, 2002 7:37 am

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dana Sheets:
Candan,

Nice quote - where did you get it?

Asher, Stephen R., & Williams, Gladys A. (1993). Children without friends, part 2: The reasons for peer rejection
Thanks Dana. It was material I read to deal with issue with one girl in my Scout Troop that has 16 boys and one girl..need say more?

Allen M. · Post by **Allen M.** » Wed Mar 27, 2002 8:41 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote

And just for the record - I never said women should be more like men. I'm bringing up the idea that the conventional definition of what a woman "should" be is limiting to what a woman can be.

Maybe comparing a litter to children wasn't as accurate as you wanted it to be, Dana. I wasn't attacking your statement, rather I related what I read into your opening article.

Way back when.... I remember a common theme "mess with our sister and we're gonna be messin' with you" was a good convincer.

On the woman toughness side, it's in there too even for non-tomboys. I remember as a sub-teen, some adult was threatening me with physical violence in the presence of my mom who must be all of 5'2". She flipped inside, picked him right up off the ground and jammed him against the wall while reading him the riot act. Mo-om!!

Now THAT'S woman power. ...And she never had a karate lesson in her life.

If I go back to my own childhood years of the 40s, before children were polluted by TVs, video games, and destroyed by the current epidemic of broken homes, it was natural for youngsters of say 3,4,5,6,7 (puppy litter age equivalent?) to select friends of their own gender as playmates. Most girls don't like to play with Tonka trucks and swing from tree branches and most boys don't care to play house (the children variety) or put dresses on Barbie dolls.

Maybe in today's society some parents try to force or strongly suggest to their offspring to do the opposite role. To me that does nothing except confuse and damage a kid for life. I have been approached by a few real loosers (the moms that is) who didn't appreciate rough-and-tumble playing the way boys go at it. I remember one incident in particular that opened my eyes to what was happening around me, concerning parents who screwed their kids up.

I say to leave the kids alone and, unless they pick some bad apple, let them play with whomever they want and choose whatever they want to play with, and for the most-part they do the right things all by themselves (whatever those "things" are) without any interference from the adult world. Somehow, with only a little guidance accompanied, watching how mon and dad interact with each other, and putting just a touch of God in their lives most of then they seem to do alright and make the correct choices all by themselves.

What's good for the dogs is not necessarily good for the human gender. Anyway, Dana, that's my take on the litter business.

------------------
Allen Moulton from Uechi-ryu Etcetera

LeeDarrow · Post by **LeeDarrow** » Wed Mar 27, 2002 3:47 pm

Dana-Sensei,

Comments interspersed, noted, as always by my classic ** to denote where my comments are.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Dana Sheets:
There is a difference to me between abuse and assault. The main differences are time and quantity.

I think assault is associated with unique instances.

Abuse implies longer term and multiple instances.

**And techniques that are often NOT physical in nature.

Training to defend against assault is most of what martial arts training covers - at least in my experience.

Training to defend against abuse it a much more complex idea - it involves an awareness of emotional boundries and the ability to know when those boundries have been compromised. It also involves the ability to be aware of what is and is not appropriate in a relationship. And finally it involve the ability to do something to either change or end the relationship.

**Well said! The issues in training to deal with abuse - especially emotional abuse, even if coupled with physical abuse - include spotting the control issues the abuser has, dealing with emotional blackmail (a favorite tactic of the abuser), the "slap-hug" sequence, where a physical abuse will occur and then is followed by major statements of remorse, cuddling, holding, apologies and promises of it never happening again which anchors the idea that the abuser actually cares about their victim (which on many levels, they may - but in a manner which is not healthy or acceptable).

** The emotional issues in dealing with abuse, even primarily physical abuse, are multiple and not often obvious nor confronted. My wife, who was for years a comeptetive figure skater, would come in to work with bruises from falling on the ice. Her co-workers THOUGHT she was in an abusive relationship (as her then-boyfriend was known for having a temper), but never mentioned anything until SHE mentioned how she got the bruises and they expressed relief that it wasn't what they thought it was!

** Another BIG issue in abuse situations is denial. The victim is often led to believe that he or she is somehow responsible for bringing the abuse (read: "punishment") upon themselves. Often the victim will make involved and convoluted excuses for their abuser's behavior, sometimes even going to the extent of taking the blame for the abuser's actions against another member of the family.

** As martial artists, we train for the right now, in-your-face attacks. Perhaps, just perhaps, we need to expand our horizons to include situations of emotional and physical abuse. Perhaps linking with a local women's shelter or psychology team that specializes in abuse issues for a series of seminars to your students would be appropriate and helpful.

I think women who train in martial arts can benefit in both areas - but I have no idea if that's true or how to prove it.

** Dana-Sensei, it has been said by people more knowing than I - any training that imparts information and defenses one does not have is good training.

[This message has been edited by Dana Sheets (edited March 26, 2002).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Respectfully,

Lee Darrow, C.Ht.