I spent the last couple of weeks reflecting on posts I have written in 2007, but I have also looked at the responses to these posts. I feel lucky that so many rational, interesting, witty and thoughtful people choose to leave comments on here.
I am extremely grateful for the group of regular readers and commenters that visit this blog. I want you all to know that many of your perspectives, opinions and ideas continue to be an inspiration to me. I hope that what I write continues to be of interest and inspiration to you in return. After all, it is the least I can do, isn’t it? 
To this end, I ask you for some feedback to help kickstart 2008. What content would you like to see on Engendertruth in the future? Are there any questions I have yet to answer? Anything you feel I missed in 2007 you would like me to explore further in 2008? Anywhere you think I am barking up the wrong tree? Is there anything you especially enjoyed and would like me develop something similar in the future?
Please leave a message after this post if you have any feedback, I would really appreciate it. 
Many thanks to you all.
15 Comments
January 25, 2008 at 9:49 am
How about something on friendships and The Gender War. Or how sometimes Feminist and Men’s Rights idelogies can create a rift between friends who are really 110% faithful in their own belife systems. It’s a personal one.
Then there’s that article called “The Coming American Matriarchy”. We can have a big discussion on the content.
January 25, 2008 at 6:10 pm
When you say friendships and the gender war, what are you referring to? Is it specifically male/female friendships or did you have something else in mind?
You are welcome to email me any personal stories you may have if you are comfortable to share them. Do you have any Men’s Rights and Feminist friends? Does their ideologies create rifts? Do you have any examples to tell? I would be interested to hear them. If I ever quote them in future posts I will be sure to ask you first and either credit you to them, or not if you want to remain unknown.
I do like the idea of Friendships and the Gender War, though. It demonstrates that there is more to men/women relationships besides love, sex, marriage and dating.
Cheers for the feedback Sam!
January 26, 2008 at 1:59 am
Well, since this story of mine is pretty private, I’d prefer if I could e-mail you instead of display it on this site. What’s your e-mail address?
Oh, and don’t forget “The Coming American Matriarchy”. This article will be great to debate on.
February 3, 2008 at 11:38 pm
Great question and happy to offer as near a $250,000 bucket worth of ideas as I can as I believe Engender Truth is worth at least this much, and I would not insult these great ideas or the time and effort you put into them by offering $0.02, Emm.
(and I include in the value offered the insights offered by other reader-commentors) Course, maybe I should offer Euro, rather than dollars. (wry grin)
Here’s what I would like to see:
1. More articles from others – become a multi-user blogger and offer more opportunities for others to contribute. Yeah, I promise I’ll deliver up a few. And this is simply to support your excellent efforts, Emm, not a complaint about any of your posts, I truly do love themm all. (chorkle)
2. The idea Sam has about the Coming American Matriarchy is interesting though I’m not so sure the prediction is “in the bag” so to speak; nor do I think Hilary Clinton the best option for a president (though she has the advantage of not having a “hard act to follow”), but then I don’t think America is a democracy, it’s a corporatocracy (fascist) and a change of president and party in government won’t change that. I don’t see the American people waking up to that just yet. They’re still blinded by the idea of American Mythology having something to do with their daily reality despite all the evidence to the contrary.
Certainly, NZ has a sign welcoming guests to “The Women’s Republic of New Zealand” so perhaps some review of this claim (the idea of nations as matriarchies) with all due respect to Gender Balance would be good and interesting, and even of other countries that are getting that right. Be great to hear from some of the other nations around the world and include their perspectives on gender relationships in their countries.
3. Saner tips for great relationships. (Shameless plug coming up)…There’s a song I’ve written with Joel Falconer, musician, songwriter, unpublished author/poet, called Violence of the Soul (title song for his band’s first album, to be released – all going well – in 2009 – just heard the first demo and gotta say, I’m chuffed with what Joel and the band are doing with this material) . Anyway, there’s a line in it about “relationships”, though the album is not confined to the consequence or outcomes (emotional or otherwise) of gender abuse, which is just one of the ways in which our individual existence may be hard done by. The line in the song touches on the fact of relationships being betrayed, and I’d like to see Engender Truth, it’s readers and contributors approaching positive strategies for strengthening relationships from various perspectives without it turning into a “bitch-or-bastard party.”
3. I’d like to see more on the practical every day ways in which people experience gender abuse through communication (verbal, nonverbal, signage, advertising, etc.). I think when we grok these mechanisms (passive-aggressive behavior, as one example) and how they work, I think we’ll have a much better idea of how to deal with them and strengthen our personal relationship ‘management’ skills. (Apologies for the corporate speak, can’t think of something else to use at the moment – do not like the idea of corporate-speak invading human relationships – it dehumanizes)
Identifying their historical genesis, and how they are used, would also be useful to unraveling the history of imbalance. It seems from the comments you’ve made about books you’re reading would be good reading. Like to see some of your analysis and review of these works, Emm.
4. I’d like to see more from couples in strong gender balanced relationships presenting their strategies for success. But think they should be real about defining the type of relationship they have (”don’t gush, it reads false,” if you get my drift), as diversity in relationship-types is also interesting and people develop perfectly workable relationships that are respectful even though from the outside their doesn’t appear to be an obvious balance to observers. I’m not suggesting salacious nor intimate details, but I am suggesting communicating honestly about the nature of the relationship.
I’d keep in mind that “Absolutes do not exist,” and that that statement is the only exception. Perfection is not attainable.
5. As we progress in discussing and considering these ideas I’d like to see this develop into more of a movement. Not necessarily political, nor anything else, but an organic social movement driven by mutual respect that actually has some social effect and outcome.
I’m not sure how we might achieve this, but would like to see us at least entertaining the idea that working together we might be able to balance some of the negative aspects that are ripping the fabric of society apart, segregating the sexes in a divisive way, and bring a new balanced and invigorated perspective to life and relationships without becoming dogma.
Stable respectful friendly relationships that are fun to be in and characterized by mutual achievement of desirable agreed upon goals, would be a possible outcome. I’m not necessarily advocating any one of the -gamy’s either as I’m not so sure that any of the old structures are actually valuable or natural. Doesn’t mean I ‘m an advocate of any, just means exactly what it says: I’m not sure they work. Alternatives should be considered. Personal insecurities should be examined, because they have something to do with Relationship Insecurity, whatever shape or form it takes and manifests as.
Just getting the ideas out there in the public eye that disarm the stereotypes, the gender abuse, the mechanisms of marginalization and relationship destruction in positive ways that disarm and provide alternatives to the propaganda from the opposing poles of feminism and masculism, and develop a balanced perspective.
6. Keep the playful rational spirit alive. Emm, you bring a wonderful levity to tough subjects that offer insightful perspective and I think that’s extremely important.
7. Develop respect for men in women and develop respect for women in men. Of all the things we can do here to balance the alternatives that undermine society, I believe this is one of the most important things we can do.
I do think ET is well on the way to going home with this, never mind the long distance call!
(chuckle)
Happy New Year Engender Truth! Keep following those ~s
February 3, 2008 at 11:48 pm
I also like the idea of exploring the idea Sam forwarded of Friendship and the Gender War, and agree with Emm’s ideas on this.
Personally, bigotry of any kind turns me off wherever and whenever I find it. Doesn’t end a relationship, simply modifies its depth and defines its boundaries more narrowly than they may otherwise be, depending on the degree of viewpoint tolerance present relationship growth may be limited in terms of its potential. A debate of ideas is always welcome, personal attacks are not.
When a company utilizes some gender-issue to exacerbate differences and play upon the stereotype in a negative way, I make sure I stop buying their products, for example.
Anyway, yeah, that’s a cool idea, Sam.
February 6, 2008 at 8:42 am
Thanks for the praise of my idea towards diversifying this place.
To tell you the truth, the mistake I made was getting involved with someone who is so far into their belifes that any critique is an attack. In my case, it was my critique of feminism thought of as wanting to return to the days where women were thought of as less than human beings. “Defending The Patriarchy” as someone once called it.
With an answer like that, how is it even remotely possible to discuss things?
(Sigh) The more I think about it, the less attracted to feminism I am nowadays compared to a year ago. Or even attracted to anything having to do with Gender Issues.
February 7, 2008 at 3:26 am
Well, personally I’m not too interested in “defending the patriarchy” though I can understand there are those who will. Equity as another commenter put it, is probably a better term than Equality.
“any critique is an attack” – yeah, that’s an interesting mechanism/strategy that some people employ to “shoot down” those things that hit too close to exposing the fallacy of some ideas.
I remember seeing a report on CNN in 2002-3 (IIRC) from two female scientists who insisted that projections indicated that a matriarchical society will not bring the expected ‘world peace’ and will in fact exacerbate conflict far more than it does under a patriarchical system. But I personally find the very idea that male or female gender are better than the other when it comes to rule or any other topic is completely contrary to the evidence. Given equal opportunity either gender can prove their merit in a given set of circumstances. And as they are human beings, are subject to the pressures of society just like anybody else and so can break down and lose ground.
But the very idea of meritocracy is often made mockery of.
Our cultural programming is still suffering from legacy ideas that are irrelevant. There are, here and there, power imbalances, and those who because of their character and not necessarily their gender are willing to exploit those imbalances for personal gain and dominion over others of either gender.
If and when, in the context of intimate relationships, that’s consensual, it’s fine. When it’s not, it isn’t. Leastwise that’s my consideration around this idea.
But an “answer like that” makes it impossible to discuss things, and I would personally consider: that is the whole point of such an answer. To make it impossible to address anything. In relationships I have been in, that’s what I’ve seen is one of the first indicators of relationship breakdown an overt or covert refusal to engage in dialog about something important to the other partner.
Man, I’ve had more experience with that one than I ever care to relay and I consider it to be one of the most cowardly and dishonorable tactics.
I am a big fan of communication and consider sabotaging communication to be one of the most destructive things anybody can do.
February 7, 2008 at 5:03 am
Aside from this place, I wonder if there are any people out there, Feminist or whatever ideology (though personally, I’d like some evidence of any SANE feminists who are open minded. I seem to be running into the extreme ones), who are actually well-balanced in the head and willing to LISTEN to what others have to say instead of shooting them down with “You’re defending the Patriarchy” or whatever, “You’re priveledged”, “Typical male/female” etc, etc. Granted, I’ve never heard these uttured openly, but they’re hidden in every counterpoint. Some are so obvious that it makes the entire experience of debating even more painful, for you’re venerable to personal attack.
I don’t think of myself as privledged. I was persecuted in my early days constantly because of how my brain was wired to perceive incoming information when I was born.
February 7, 2008 at 7:18 pm
NDK and Sam, both of your messages have been really interesting, and I will endeavour to take your suggestions on board.
Apologies for not commenting sooner, I have been laying low with a bug recently, so I haven’t been online as much as I could.
I also would like to address the issue of debating, because this is part of the problem. A lot of us (on all sides; male and female) has lost the ability to discuss, we are no longer interested in EXPLORATION of ideas and topics. No, we have to be RIGHT and our debating fellows WRONG. This is just insane. I am not promoting that everyone is right (or wrong), but making a point that we have lost our point for debating in the first place.
I see debate and discussion as exploration from multiple perspectives…or even testing your own worldly views against those of a different person or demographic…or whatever. It isn’t about proving others to be wrong, and myself right.
If people understood how to debate fairly, how to promote their views with passionate sincerity, without resorting to dirty little tricks and mind-bending rewording of counter-arguments – wouldn’t the gender debates be less of a strain? It doesn’t mean we can all agree, it doesn’t even mean there won’t be any anger or frustration…but it can at least be civil and less killing of brain cells can occur. (Poor wee things
)
What do you think?
February 8, 2008 at 2:19 am
Thanks for your acknowledgment, Emm.
Good obs (observation) on debate, Emm, I agree. The ability to debate and reason has been under attack. Al Gore alluded to this with his book The Assault on Reason. I quote:
“Faith in the power of reason—the belief that free citizens can govern themselves wisely and fairly by resorting to logical debate on the basis of the best evidence available, instead of raw power—remains the central premise of American democracy. This premise is now under assault.”
What (ethnocentric) Americans do not acknowledge however, is that this is not a uniquely American problem for as much that they perceive the world as an American world, it is not – may it never be.
Dumbing down is real.
Understanding spin, and how “truth” is manipulated is important. Understanding the techniques of the “Shock Doctrine” and how they are employed in conversation to create emotional shocks which numb the intellect is also vital, for it reveals motivation.
Debate and rational discourse, logic and reason are definitely under assault and have been for some time. Gore also says this,
“democracy is now in danger—not from any one set of ideas, but from unprecedented changes in the environment within which ideas either live and spread, or wither and die. I do not mean the physical environment; I mean what is called the public sphere, or the marketplace of ideas…faith in the viability of representative democracy rested on their trust in the wisdom of a well-informed citizenry, their ingenious design for checks and balances, and their belief that the rule of reason is the natural sovereign of a free people….[The Founding Fathers] made a special point—in the First Amendment—of protecting the freedom of the printing press. And yet today, almost 45 years have passed since the majority of Americans received their news and information from the printed word. Newspapers are hemorrhaging readers. Reading itself is in decline. The Republic of Letters has been invaded and occupied by the empire of television…
“In the world of television, the massive flows of information are largely in only one direction, which makes it virtually impossible for individuals to take part in what passes for a national conversation. Individuals receive, but they cannot send. They hear, but they do not speak. The ‘well-informed citizenry’ is in danger of becoming the ‘well-amused audience.’”
But when the media does not well-inform. When the education system does not do more than prepare people for the corporate desk, when television demonstrates that the way to win is to “blow something up,” or “someone away” (euphemism for kill them) what can you expect other than a decline of reason?
The internet is such a powerful medium because it permits at least in part, a reversal of this sort of idea and practice. It gets people reading – and writing and freely articulating their thoughts. The only other problem after that is generating attention and spreading the ideas, and that puts you in the field of marketing ideas. As you’ve noticed with your most recent post on spamming, that is fraught with corrupt and fraudulent practices which undermine and attack the reputation of those who reason, who can still think critically, and connect apparently disparate facts and observations and make them into a bigger picture understanding for people who are desperate to make sense of what is going on and why our civilization is in a constant state of teeter, totter and titter.
The only answer to this is of course to continue. The attacks and attempts to undermine your reasoned arguments and that of others are simply a sign of success. Realize them as such and be proud. Then continue to do exactly what you’ve been doing, and enlarge your scope, though not without some clear reflection and self-examination because that is vital to ensuring that you’re staying on point and on purpose. This is the only usefulness such attacks have; they shore up good purpose, good intent.
Of course, then they’ll endeavor to ignore you. And the answer to that is continue to communicate and find the people who need and want what you’re offering.
I’ve written a song about this very topic with Joel Falconer, who is busy composing the music for it. It’s called Truth Blows the Lies Away and the main line goes like this:
Truth blows the lies away | it’ll always be that way | cos the truth always comes before the lie
(All world wide rights reserved)
So, yeah, as you have alluded to in your previous comment, understanding the machinations to which communication may be subjected is absolutely vital.
The convolutions of logic that some people utilize to refute truth and damage honesty are just about the most corrupt, loathsome and disgusting tactics that people who are standing on shaky smelly and rotten principles use to hurt and silence those of good intent.
In this light Engender Truth is such an inspired name for what you’re doing here Emm. Thanks for making us all a part of it.
I too, subscribe to this idea:
“I see debate and discussion as exploration from multiple perspectives…or even testing your own worldly views against those of a different person or demographic…or whatever. It isn’t about proving others to be wrong, and myself right.”
Others seem to think it is, the moment they take that position, I know immediately that I’m dealing with someone who is incapable of debate or discourse. It is always a disappointment for I love to test the value and worth of an idea in the crucible of debate that is focused on the idea, and not the person who is forwarding it.
Genius knows no class.
Of course the ability to hold a position on a point of principle in communication can be extremely difficult, as any weakness will be exploited by the manipulative in order to “score points” and diminish one’s character through the tactics of disdain and degradation; Emotional abuse. When emotional abuse is employed in debate it’s a sure sign of the strength and integrity of one’s argument and reasoning, and that’s why emotional abuse is then entered as a tactic. One should then press the point home, without resorting to a similar tactic, because that will lower the quality of the argument.
The Art of War by Sun Tzu forwards some good ideas that are extremely useful to consider and know if one would strengthen one’s ability to communicate and reason.
One must, as an effective debater, however, be prepared to lose the debate, and an honest debater is prepared to do so, is prepared to concede to point of rationale and reason, though how one does that is an important tactical decision in itself, requiring a critical assessment of how the opponent will utilize such a concession.
Those opponents who find it necessary to resort to snide remarks (emotional abuse), are indicating at once that their position (from the POV of rationale and reason) is flawed, exposed and weak. One must then decide whether compassion or exploitation of their weakness is to be employed.
When this is happening at the speed of thought, that can be a problem, particularly for those who are sensitive to social environments and not willing to lower the tone of the debate from rational to emotional. Of course that position, is one that the nasty debater (for want of a label), will endeavor to create when their position is challenged and exposed. They will create a perception of having won an argument even though they lost. Unfortunately, most people today do not have the integrity or sophistication to know how to deal with such a situation, even though they may want to.
It’s a sorry state of affairs where integrity appears to lose out, and the internal situation in such a circumstance undermines one’s character, and ‘eats the soul’ ever after, or at least until one figures out the lessons of mistake.
(chorkle)
Well there you go. Another long post. What can I say? I love communication, and I know a little bit about it.
February 8, 2008 at 9:29 am
Hah! If you want a good example of how NOT to argue, do take a look at the nastiness of feminists on this thread
http://www.thecampusword.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2106&Itemid=364&mosmsg=Thanks+for+your+vote%21
(if the coding doesn’t work, just copy and paste the url between )
February 8, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Yeah. More “point scoring” and utterly provocative, looking to create an argument rather than debate an issue. Link worked fine, Emm.
February 10, 2008 at 6:45 am
I’d rather not follow that link. It’d spare me from having to feel complete anger whenever counterarguements are more like attacks instead of meaningful debates. Especially with certain feminists.
Here’s what I think now: I believe in equality. I believe in women being respected for who they are. Same with men. I do not agree with either side tarring and feathering because of the bad apples in the bunch.
In short, I’m a feminist. But I don’t like the “ism” part of being a feminist. It’s a shut-in world, wether they want to admit it or not. Ditto for Men’s Rights.
February 26, 2008 at 8:44 am
There’s a really useful concept about generating energy, and it sort of turns up in judo also. The idea is to use an incoming force to your advantage. Takes bit of thinking though.
The idea is that force is generated when two poles hold a fixed position and there is a solid fixed base between them. This keeps them apart and allows tension (energy) to be transfered between them. It’s one of the basic ideas behind a motor or generator.
So long as the poles (viewpoints) are fixed and the base (issue) solid then energy is generated.
But what if you choose a different pole, a different base?
Why be a fixed pole (viewpoint)?
February 29, 2008 at 2:01 am
Hmmm. Some interesting thoughts there….and I have been thinking of synergy for all this time
I should look into that.