Are Women Taught to be Leaders in Our Society?
As I was writing the article “Americans Are Neurotic Dogs Without an Alpha”, I realized that women are not taught to be leaders in today’s society. Why? As someone who is all about empowerment, this simple, little question was bothering me. When I think of the rare women in leadership positions today, I think of women that are overbearing, manipulative and even well… bitchy. I am not being judgmental, I am just being observant, and I definitely don’t agree with the double standard either. Men that act the same are just as bad.
But, before you think I am a sexist man that does not understand women, don’t. I was raised by my wonderful mother, and she is the reason I am who I am today. I owe everything to her, and if anyone resembles the powerful leader, it is her. When she was a rung (Vice President) in the corporate ladder getting paid the least of all her male peers and then was the first to get demoted when the company had a down slide, I never felt such disgust for the American societal standard. Now that you know who I am, please listen to what I have to say…
Why are powerful women, especially American women, so rare? And, why is a powerful woman such a seemingly negative thing? Could it be because of religion, or politics…? Why are we afraid of the powerful woman? Where does this fear stem from? These are all questions that desperately need to be answered.
Let’s look at the most basic rationale behind the differences in sexes, and how they are raised. I passively stand around watching how some of my friends are raising their kids, and how they treat the different sexes. I make sure to really observe the affects of their parenting with the most non-judgmental, open-minded, not clouded by politics, religion or societal expectations. Here is what I have observed.
Boys and girls are treated vastly different in today’s society. Boys are raised to be tough, fearless, emotionless and strong. On the other end of the spectrum, girls are taught to be somewhat submissive, mannerly, non-aggressive, fearful, cautious and to be attractive. What is the rationale for this type of treatment? Is it because Adam created Eve, so therefore men are better than women? Ha, hate that option! Is it because women are just weaker, so they need to be treated as such? Hate that one too! I can’t think of one good reason for this atrocious reasoning.
There are only three main differences between males and females. One, males have about 10 times the amount of testosterone. Two, males have significantly more skeletal muscle as women. Three, women do not have penises and testicles. Does this mean we have to raise them significantly different? Well, let’s dive into the endocrine system, as hormones make the most difference in creating the sexes… right? And, since the other two are not that significant, we will ignore them.
Testosterone is what makes men aggressive, tough, strong and promiscuous. It is what makes men, men. Well, actually, no! The only thing that testosterone does is create the extra skeletal muscle, create the male reproductive system and make men a little leaner. The aggression, toughness, and promiscuity are misnomers when it comes to this master hormone. One of the most interesting and truly ground-breaking discoveries involves androgen insensitive males, also called AIS.
AIS is when all the body’s cells are lacking the receptor for the endocrine’s androgenic hormones — namely testosterone and its partner hormones. The effects of this condition are absolutely amazing. What happens is the male’s body cannot utilize the testosterone that is being created by the endocrine system. When the fetus is in the first trimester, we all start out as female. Then the XY difference kicks in, and the body starts to secrete androgen hormones to make males, males. When a male has AIS, he just stays female. The only difference between the AIS male and a genetically real female is the shallow vagina and lack of real ovaries, uterus, menstruation cycle and fertility. So, is he a man or a woman? Good question!
You may have said to yourself after meeting one, “Damn, she was gorgeous!” Even more interesting is that he usually does not even realize that genetically she is actually a male. What?! Yeah, they are almost always believed to be 100% female. Here is what Wikipedia says about this condition.
At birth, a child with CAIS appears to be a typical girl, with no reason to suspect an incongruous karyotype and testosterone level, or lack of uterus.
Childhood growth is normal…
Puberty tends to begin slightly later than the average for girls. As the hypothalamus and pituitary signal the testes to produce testosterone, amounts more often associated with boys begin to appear in the blood. Some of the testosterone is converted into estradiol, which begins to induce normal breast development. Normal reshaping of the pelvis and redistribution of body fat occurs as in other girls. Little or no pubic hair or other androgenic hair appears, sometimes a source of worry or shame. Acne is rare.
As menarche typically occurs about two years after breast development begins, no one usually worries about lack of menstrual periods until a girl reaches 14 or 15 years of age. At that point, an astute physician may suspect the diagnosis just from the breast/hair discrepancy…
Adult women with CAIS tend to be taller than average, primarily because of their later timing of puberty. Breast development is said to be average to above average. Lack of responsiveness to androgen prevents some usual female adult hair development, including pubic, axillary, upper lip. In contrast, head hair remains fuller than average, without recession of scalp or thinning with age.
By clinical reports and information from support groups, women with CAIS are at least as likely as other women to have a female gender identity and to be attracted sexually to men.
So what does this tell us? For one thing, all organism’s default sex is female. In other research, you may find out that there is no such thing as an organism that just has males among its species, but you will find many organisms that are all female. Sounds like men are just for reproduction, because when the females can reproduce on their own, we are just not in existence. Umm, sounds like females may be the master sex… Leadership, that’s right, so back to the original discussion…
When AIS patients are interviewed they are asked many questions that pertain to the myths of testosterone and its effects on the human body since they are a perfect control group for what testosterone does, or at least what it doesn’t do in its absence. These AIS males will tell you that they have strong sex drives, get very angry, have a drive to get physical and have aggression issues just like normal males. Umm, so what does testosterone do then? It does exactly what I said above — create more skeletal muscle, create the male reproductive system and make males slightly more lean. That’s it.
The point I am trying to make is that females are supposed to be aggressive, tough, fearless and physical just like males, and when we socialize girls to be the opposite of males because of the thought that since girls lack testosterone they are supposed to be submissive, fearful, non-aggressive, we stifle their development and natural genetic progression. This causes a conflict within the development of females, so when their genetics are saying get aggressive and push back, they internalize it. The consequence to this is it comes out in alternate more destructive behavior, mainly mental warfare and manipulation.
Have you ever watched the Real World/Road Rules Challenge when they pitted the girls against the guys? If you haven’t seen it, it is a great study of human behavior. The guys always end up being the more peaceful of the two, and the girls end up getting extremely manipulative, backstabbing, immature, neurotic and well… bitchy.
If guys are supposed to be the aggressive ones, then why do they end up being the most peaceful? I say, it is because guys are allowed to hit each other and get in fights, which releases the anger, solving the problem the way nature intended, but women are not allowed this outlet. This in turn causes all kinds of conflicts between their peers. Sound familiar? Does it remind you of high school?
I would think this behavior would seriously deter women from being the great leaders that nature intended, and could be the explanation of why women in powerful positions are perceived in the way I mentioned before. Why do I say that the consequences of normal socialization for females makes poor leaders? Well let’s take a gander at what it takes to be a leader or alpha position of a social species, like dogs, meerkats or humans. Well, let’s borrow some text from an earlier article that I mentioned above.
The leader rules by example, through power and calm assertiveness, and lack of fear and being proactive is essential, but never rule with aggression, anger, bullying or being reactive. The most important aspect is that the leadership position is earned, through proving that it can handle any situation with calm-assertive, powerful energy.
If females are to be powerful, calm-assertive, and lead without fear, being proactive and not reactive, then we need to reassess what we are creating by raising our girls to be the manipulative, catty, fearful, neurotic and emotionally reactive to the world around them. This just gets exacerbated when women start to “compete” with other females vying for promotions, raises or recognition. They end up being their own worst enemy, destroying the stability of the team. Do I have your attention yet? Hopefully, because I am about to inform you of how you can change this.
Stop raising girls as girls and boys as boys; then start raising all of them as humans, letting nature take its natural course. This will allow the individual the choice to become whatever their personality, hormones and genetics allow them to become. Instead of informing little girls that they are not supposed to be aggressive, that only boys are aggressive, cuss and are physical. Inform them that everyone has aggressive tendencies, and that it is completely natural. The secret is controlling these powerful emotions.
Instead of telling young females that only boys are supposed to have a strong sex drive, and women are the ones to control that abhorrent male behavior, communicate to them that everyone has strong sexual feelings and that it is completely natural. This is to encourage the survival of the species, just as long as it is under control and actions are taken to be smart and proactive in protecting oneself from abuse and disease.
Instead of conveying to girls that boys are inherently going to try to control them and take advantage of them, not allowing them to go out on dates and having them in earlier than their brothers, which does nothing but instill fear and thoughts that they are weaker than boys and naturally submissive, tell them that humans can take advantage of other people and they should be cautious no matter the circumstance. And, for God’s sake, never have a set of separate rules for their brothers or male counterparts.
If we can just stop projecting our fears, insecurities, religious judgments and societal condemnations onto our offspring and allow the human no matter the sex, race, religion or ethnicity to fully develop into the powerful ‘being’ that nature intended us to be, the world would be full of great leaders and wonderful people. And, who knows, your daughter might be the next President of the United States, because you were willing to take a risk and allow your human offspring to be whatever IT wanted to be.
14 Comments so far
Leave a reply
New Scientist
The Onion
Media Matters
Newsvine
Associated Press
This gave me quite a bit of insight … more about you than anything. As a lurker with an “IT” nick, I agree with your conclusions wholeheartedly.
I’ll comment though, that thing that makes “guys” into “guys” (testoterone) also has a counterpart that makes gals into “gals” (plain ole hormones!). Those snippy (can’t think of a more appropriate term in someone else’s space) little girls are the way they are because of hormones! I swear by it.
Have a daughter … you’ll see. The “pecking order” among little girls starts as early as second grade.
And I swear I’m gonna report mine to Spamcop for putting me on her little friends mass-mailing list (only 350 or so) with all their cutie stories and “read this and pass it on to 10 people or you will die tomorrow!” emails.
I’m not talking about “spammers” selling something. I’m talking 12 and 13-year-olds clicking on “send to my friends” (who happen to be half the world).
There’s a new generation of females coming up. But it may take a few beyond that.
But the lack of leadership qualities you mention can also be applied to more male-dominated entities (including Twig) than you thought about. It’s actually a mind-set, or perspective, and my understanding from sociology and psychology is that it has to do with how balanced someone is about their own masculinity and femininity (we are both). You’ll find women who some attempt to label too masculine and they are offended.
Many others, myself included, shrug it off because we know better. I personally think women act “submissive” to attempt to passively control who they are dealing with (assuming a man). But you will find in any relationship or friendship, one generally tends to be more submissive or passive.
It’s a very thought provoking subject.
Interesting. Now go have a daughter. Boy do your perspectives change then! At least mine did. I looked on in confusion as a 9-month-old wouldn’t be seen by anyone without a hat and necklace, and it got worse from then on.
A lot of little girl’s behavior comes from what they observe in older females. Even though they are young, it’s hard to tell what’s nature and what’s nurture. Regardless, I think both cause the difference between men and women.
I think real men are warriors, but the term ‘real man’ can apply to women too. You know?
Warrior Scott…
I checked out the link … nice, and good philosophy.
However, I’m going to comment that “warrior” isn’t limited to physical strength or ability. I know a lot of such types who don’t have it.
It’s a mentality. An approach to life with a sense of self-responsibility and responsibility for those around you. You say that quite well on what I assume to be your webpage.
For example, look at the disabled who have added so much! to our society. Stephen Hawking, Chris Reeve, and so many others who aren’t named to public view.
I’ve always enjoyed the scene at the end of “GI Jane” where Demi Moore’s character is given the poem about how a little bird doesn’t feel sorry for itself when it falls out of the tree.
Enjoyed your comment immensely. And by the way, there’s one thing to always remember … Warriors (even the male ones) have …
Mothers!
I also recommend you get a daughter. BTW, I’m a “mom” and my child is an alien from somewhere. Haven’t figured out yet, but I think she will probably return to that sweet young thing about her mid-twenties.
127001…
I am trying to understand what you are saying here. Could you elaborate?
From what I understand about the endocrine system, girls and guys are identical in hormones except for the exponentially high amounts of testosterone in men. What does this mean? Well, I think the “snippyness” may not be the hormones after all. That is kind of what I was trying to get at in the article. That the men with AIS end up being everything a women is to the “T” except for the reproductive system. Some never realize that they are male until there early twenties. Could it be then our sociological environment that creates the snippy factor? Guys may not be snippy, because they are allowed to be very physical. Now this is not including what happens during PMS, now that is hormonal.
That must be frustrating. Sorry.
I would definitely say that the patriarchal society today is to be heavily blamed for our unbalanced male, female communities. But, I have to ask… what is Twig? As far as your balanced male and female qualities, that is exactly what I was trying to get at. Instead of trying to influence the girl in the female and the boy in the male, let it come naturally. They will find that balance that is right for them.
That is exactly right. Why do they do that? Well, I believe woman are taught to be submissive through societal standards, but women are just like any other human and they want their share of power as well. So, the will acquire it their way, passive aggressively. They will assert themselves mentally instead of physically.
I have actually dealt with many kids (4 years old to 12), male and female. They of course were not mine, but I took care of them Mon-Fri from 3 to 6:30 pm. I used to run an after school program that incorporated martial arts, and I was one of the head instructors as well.
It was probably my most proud accomplishment to this date. We were the most successful programs in central Texas.
As far as my own kids, I will have one sooner or later. I will probably adopt as well. Anyway, thanks for the great addtions to the site. Hope to hear more from you 127001.
Warrior Scott…
I like the warrior thing, as I have taught it for years, but I would have to agree with 127001. I think we can place to much emphasis on the physical and not on the mind. The warrior mentality has to come from within, it is a belief of personal intrinsic power. I have been involved with martial arts my entire life, and what I have noticed more than anything is that you can have all the physical skill in the world, but if you lack the powerful mind, you are missing 90% of what makes someone a true warrior.
Thanks for the comment Scott, I would love to hear more about the Warrior thing you are involved with. I love talking about that kind of stuff. Hope to hear from you soon.
cerebral …
127001 is 127.0.0.1
Actually, I just saw a science article about how teen girls (and women actually, ask anyone who has dealt with PMS) have hormonal changes. But there are differences more than testosterone. It’s not just genetics and its certainly not just societal. A slight difference in chemical balance can throw the body and mind into chaos. The outward behavior simply reflects it. But remember too, that human behavior can be applied to the analogy of flowing water … it will always go the easiest path (i.e., what works). If something works twice it becomes a pattern. Three times and its a habit. It takes 18 months of daily conditioning to “undo” a habit and even then there’s the weakness to return to it.
Twig … Look at one of Blog4Brains earlier posts. One word to describe Bush. Mine is “Twig” (or Twit or Twat; dictionary terms and not nice at all).
As for the rest of your reply … (LOL) … sigh … you’re so young and so innocent. Some little girl will knock you flat some day. hehehe
127001 —
Oh, I totally agree with you on the PMS thing, that is why I mentioned it on the prior comment. If there are true differences in the “non-PMS” state, they are more slight than people may think. I still stand behind the statement that men are basically women, just with more testosterone. That is why female is the default sex. If you love to read and this subject is interesting to you, buy Woman: An Intimate Geography by Natalie Anger. The book is fantastic! A must read for anyone that has daughters.
I, of course, could be wrong, this subject is always controversial and not well understood within the scientific community. I don’t want to seem like the know-it-all, as I am sure your experience with raising daughters has created a lot of your perspective.
This, I could not agree with more, and it reaffirms my idea about how societal standards create the sexes. Wouldn’t that path of least resistance be what our society accepts as female or male. Haven’t we also been raising girls as girls and boys as boys for… well, ever? We are providing the path and that happens to be the path of least resistance. Just look at the struggle that gays go through in their lifetime growing up not “being” the societal standard of what a man should be. Fitting in has an extremely powerful affect on who we become. That is kind of the point I was trying to make in my article. About raising all sexes as humans, instead of different “sexes”.
Hey that is not fair, I will have to pull a yellow flag on you. Of course that is a non-debatable issue, and I will never win this one. Your just not playing fair.
Bottom line, I think we agree with most of it, and the only difference is I place more importance on our actions and intentions we place on raising our kids and you seem to place more importance on what is innate and genetic within us when we are born. I would like to say that this has been a great debate, and I thank you for the interaction.
“Hey that is not fair, I will have to pull a yellow flag on you. Of course that is a non-debatable issue, and I will never win this one. Your just not playing fair…”
(Tongue in cheek)… Course I’m not fair! I’m an ole lady! Hehehe…
Truth is though, identity is so intertwined … sexual, psychological, spiritual, physical.
To apply all of it to physiology or science just doesn’t work. If you do, some higher (or lower) power or awareness out there will come kick you to make you humble again.
I’ve personally been humbled a number of times. And I’ll note that the “battle of” or “conflict between” the sexes is nothing when you put the kid factor in there. There must be a reason its said kids are our future. They are the melting pot, and they will do as they please and figure out their own influences. Just watch. You sometimes look at them (yours or others) and think: “What planet landed them! here.”
Sigh. I’m not so old I don’t remember when “we” always said don’t trust anyone over 30. But now I look at anyone under 15 and ask, “Did you see Home Alone, and how often?”
BTW, in first grade my little sweetie’s favorite movie was Terminator 2. Disney movies teach sex and violence (just watch them some time). How much of that do you think is really influencing kids? More than parents, that’s for sure. Or even society at large. The movies and media (real or not) have parented our kids with respect to influencing more than is admitted at large.
Women are more equal than men. If men were as tough as women, or tougher than women, and if so, then men would be the ones to undergo giving birth.
Let’s take another look at the story of Adam and Eve not from the perspective of the male storyteller, but the female storyteller. Bear in mind that when I transferred from the University of Pgh to W&J, two semesters of music
appreciation and religion were required courses. I did study the Bible and I did Bible homework. So please, bear with me and my story as the female storyteller and the version I believe is correct:
Adam was a coward and a loser. He wanted Eve to DO IT and take the rap. And the “devil in the bushes” was none other than Adam himself. He could only be “strong” when hiding behind a rock or bushes. Shame had nothing to do with it. Ooo Sooo, he disguised his voice, pitched it, and tried to fool Eve, make her think the snake was speaking to her. The crazy fool!
That “snake” that stuck out of the bushes was none other than Adam’s stiff, black-shafted motherflicker and it wasn’t a red or yelow flicker –but a black flicker? Ain’t no black-shafted flickers (woodpeckers) around here and therefore, hence, thusly, that sticking out there ain’t no ordinary woodpecker. And ain’t no snakes with foreskins over their heads around here either. It’s just Adam’s “snake”. Adam thought he fooled Eve because she DID IT. She DID IT because SHE wanted to do it and already knew what a climax by hand was — Great, by Gawk!
Amd, get this straight: the most perfect fruit in the world and in the gated-community of Eden Gardens was the banana, not the apple with its worm and ground rot. That’s the way that fool, black-shafted, motherflicker Mr. Adam claimed it was. It ain’t so.
Nevertheless, everything ended happily after all: Eve became Mrs. Eve and Mr. Adam went out and got a job.
–30–
Gee Stan (ROFLMAO!)
Testosterone levels huh?
Men and Women are pretty equal in my book, and the Bible has very little to do with it.
I’m getting confused. This all started with application to physiology, where I kinda commented and set that aside and brought up societal (the kid thing), and now we have religion in there determining if Women are Taught to be Leaders?
Hmmmm…
And you rather limit it because you reference the Bible only, aka Christianity, which sort of ignores other religions, much less spirituality itself.
The old “Yin/Yang” principle you know. And back to one of the original statements in the article about testosterone and progesterone levels (I earlier commented “hormones” and the word should have been progesterone), I still have to say that it really does all balance out whether we recognize it or now.
I’m reminded of an old Arabic tale, where a wise man was asked by two boys to divide nine apples between them (not accurate, but you get the sense of the story).
The wise man asked if they wanted them divided man’s way or G*d’s way. The boys replied “G*d’s way.”
The wise man gave one boy two apples, and the other boy seven apples.
The boys were angry, and asked the wise man why he did that.
The wise man replied, “You asked me to divide them G*d’s way, so I did. G*d gives us what we need, not what we want or even “think” we need.”
A thought to ponder on with reference to the subject.
Some answers, 127001, Men and women became equal when the woman sstafrted to assume the top position in Doing It. Not all are equal, some women more so than others.
Religion and women as leaders. Dieties were first women woopss, I got 5 minutes at this computer left.. abye.
I loved this assessment, however, I do believe there is a missing component. The reaction that people have to the same behavior displayed by men and women in power. You can have two intelligent, calm and assertive individuals with the same message… when delivered by a man, the message will be received, by and large, with a confidence that the man is right. When that same message is delivered by a woman, it is received more skeptically. I believe that this may inspire women that are inclined to be calm and assertive to being a bit more aggressive in their tone… just a thought.
Right on!
Stan…
ROFLMAO! … Gawd! I’ve gotten old. It has taken me forever to figure out what you meant by “Doing It” …
BuzWoman…
You make a very interesting point, and accurate too. Leaders aren’t “leaders” because they perceive themselves to be one. They are leaders because of the perception of others.
Hmmm… So how did the Twig come to power?
Maybe misinformed sheep?