TED Conversations

Ang Perrier


This conversation is closed.

How does gender affect formulation of opinion based on perception?

I'd like to kick-start this debate by asking for each person responding, to please describe their personal opinion of their ideal; a) Husband/boyfriend b) Wife/girlfriend.

I'm adding onto this now...

How different do you perceive males and females to be?

Are these differences something that can be phased out through gender neutralizing environments or are they engrained in our nature as a permanent fixture?

If there's a possibility of phasing out the differences would you choose to?
If there's not how do we address our Politically Correct world where we avoid any recognition of differences between genders?

The focus here is on the mental, emotional, and developmental differences, not so much the physical.


Closing Statement from Ang Perrier

Overall it seems as though we are able to accept and recognize that there are differences between males and females. What we are not ready to accept and recognize is that there are differences in the way we learn that should be addressed in early childhood development.

This doesn't mean the end result has to change as far as career capabilities. It means that we need to cater to these developmental differences and teach our boys the way they learn best and teach our girls the way they learn best in order for them to have the opportunity to achieve their desired goals in life.

Right now our education system is failing both genders equally and that is unfortunate. We can say that it's because we don't spend enough money on schooling, or we don't address the specific needs of each individual child. But I think that a reasonable attempt at adapting a school curriculum which incorporates certain gender differences into the lesson plan has proven to be effective and ought to be adopted by more schools and made available to anyone who thinks that their child would benefit from it.

I DO NOT mean that girls should be taught Home Ec. and boys should be taught Shop Class. I'm implying that girls and boys learn subjects such as math and science easier in 2 very different ways. Why not structure a class that is designed to teach girls/boys math the way their brains understand it best? It's not harmful for our society to look at what science can teach us about the brain and use that information in the most effective way possible.

I'd like to take this time to advocate to any parent out there reading this to do some research and decide for yourself if gender specific lesson plans could be a benefit for your child.

Start with Leonard Sax's book "Why Gender Matters" and see if you find yourself agreeing with the statements and research he's done over the past 25 years.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Apr 23 2014: Dynamism and energy in all things, as a general principle, derive from the existence of difference - not what we are led to believe as the holy grail of neutrality or equality.

    The modern clamour for gender equality will only end in grey sameness and the end of all that is beautiful and stimulating. It is the sparkling vibrance of opposites that keeps us energised and attracted to each other.

    'Phasing out gender differences' really is the stuff of nightmares for many including me, and the very suggestion of 'avoiding any recognition of difference between genders' is political correctness gone completely mad.

    What's missing in this patriarchal society, is empathy and respect for our opposites. In a matriarchy, I think there would be considerably more acceptance of such essential differences. The scourge of sexism and misogyny is possibly more a symptom, rather than a cause.

    My ideal wife is the one I have right now. She is my opposite, and would hate her to feel as though she had to be a clone, or be the equal, of me - or me to be a clone of her.
    • thumb
      Apr 24 2014: How do we progress towards a society that acknowledges and accepts the differences, accounts for them in a way both parties can live with, and reduce violence?
      • thumb
        Apr 24 2014: I wish I had the definitive answer to those questions, but what I can say with some degree of certainty is that the answer does not lie in equality. Equilibrium, which is equality's aim, is counter to the defined sexuality of male and female, and thus the perpetuation of species.

        Equality may feel politically correct in the skewed society we have created for ourselves, but it is biologically (and I would go so far as to say universally) impotent.

        A world where women have to effectively become men in order to compete in a society created largely BY men, is ostensibly civilisation in reverse. The age of enlightenment, where certainty, competitiveness and reductionism is desirable, is an era predominantly reflecting male characteristics.

        A competitive society fueled by testosterone (as is currently the case), is less likely to accommodate a tolerance of 'difference', because it negatively seeks to distance one from the other, forming elites, severing lines of communication and empathy with all who proclaim or show signs of difference.

        A matriarchy on the other hand might seek the opposite - especially in a positive acceptance of the difference between male and female.

        As with all movements and 'eras', I think it will just be a matter of time - a time during which a slow realisation will take place that the philosophies of the current era are becoming less fit for humanity's current purpose.

        The signs are that such a change is taking place right now.
        • thumb
          Apr 25 2014: Equilibrium...good word to use, I like it :)

          "A world where women have to effectively become men in order to compete in a society created largely BY men"

          For me this statement has a direct correlation to politics.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.