Crossdressers-Haven.com

HI girls,

I hijacked this from CJ's post about what she believes but can not prove, subesquently disproving part of her belief that "everything I've said in this post matters not one whit to anyone". In fact I can not stop thinking about it.

CJ wrote:

I believe that women are naturally superior to men and that men's violence is the result of an unacknowledged and repressed jealousy and envy of that superiority;

I am prejudiced in this regard, being a crossdresser. And even though I will never be a woman, and even if I had SRS I still would not be a woman, because I can not reproduce human life. The "hallmarK" of actually being a woman.

I know? You will say, "woman can not produce a baby all by herself", and I concede that. But a woman can reproduce offspring without the knowledge of the father. And in many parts of the world, particularly the industialized countries, can actually decide when to reproduce, depending on their religious beliefs and social conditions.

Socially we also value women more, at least in the western culture. When it comes to saving lives, it is women and children before men. Men give thier seat to a woman. We allow a woman to go before men. Men hold doors for women. Men do the dangerous tasks to protect women from danger. And before I get slaughtered by the feminists out there, I do not mean to say that women are incapable, or that this is always the case, I am only talking in generalities, and mean no disrespect. I am only trying to point out that there is a long tradition and history of men protecting the lives of women, over their own.

My own experience as a full time crossdresser is that I love my life as a woman, even if it is just a pretend woman. I get treated better as a pretend woman than I ever did as a man. And it is great being able to wear things that make me feel beautiful.

Personally being a man who desires to be a woman, or at the minimum dress like one. I have to admit , I do beleive women are superior to men in just about everyway, except physical strength. And I am interested to see what everyone else thinks, particularly the GG's.

Love always,
Elizabeth

I am prejudiced in this regard, being a crossdresser. And even though I will never be a woman, and even if I had SRS I still would not be a woman, because I can not reproduce human life. The "hallmarK" of actually being a woman.

I know? You will say, "woman can not produce a baby all by herself", and I concede that. But a woman can reproduce offspring without the knowledge of the father. And in many parts of the world, particularly the industialized countries, can actually decide when to reproduce, depending on their religious beliefs and social conditions.

Well, it still takes two to make one. Without the sperm there is no reproduction. And men don't have to suffer the pain of birth. However, a woman's ability to go through the labor does make them superior in that regard.

Socially we also value women more, at least in the western culture. When it comes to saving lives, it is women and children before men. Men give thier seat to a woman. We allow a woman to go before men. Men hold doors for women. Men do the dangerous tasks to protect women from danger. And before I get slaughtered by the feminists out there, I do not mean to say that women are incapable, or that this is always the case, I am only talking in generalities, and mean no disrespect. I am only trying to point out that there is a long tradition and history of men protecting the lives of women, over their own.

My own experience as a full time crossdresser is that I love my life as a woman, even if it is just a pretend woman. I get treated better as a pretend woman than I ever did as a man. And it is great being able to wear things that make me feel beautiful.

I would call that respect not superiority. However, there are quite a few women who would argue they've never been treated with respect.

Personally being a man who desires to be a woman, or at the minimum dress like one. I have to admit , I do beleive women are superior to men in just about everyway, except physical strength. And I am interested to see what everyone else thinks, particularly the GG's.

I know a few woman that are physically stronger than men.

Hi Elizabeth,

Sorry but I can not agree with that statement. I have witnessed some women commit some very foolish deeds.

I feel that making such a statement is attempting to put all women in one box under one label where they do not all fit.

There is a joke I have heard that I am reminded of here.

This young couple were madly in love and the guy asked God why he made women so beautiful?
And God replied so you could love them.
After six months of marriage, the guy asked God Why have you made woman so stupid?
And God replied so she could love you.

Maybe that helps to put things in perspective.

Love Darlene.

Hi!

My personal opinion is the everyone is equal. Women have their strong points as do men and vice versa.

Hugs,
Stef

I've always had a sort of instinctive attitude that women are intrinsically 'better' than men and me in specific, more beautiful, more praiseworthy, more deserving of my love attention and care. Of course I was both a closet CD and a 'submissive' who believed himself to be straight. I still don't feel the same feelings towards men, I see bois more as equal creatures to myself. It's interesting to self-inventory these feeling tendencies. I've always found it a lot easier to make friends with women than with men - they just seem to talk about such interesting things, emotions and spirituality and social relationships, as opposed to the 'typical male' whose range of subjects may cover sports (and/or video games, wrestling, weapons and war, etc), sex, beer, sex, work, sex, sex, stupid geeky obsessions, and sex. OTOH I have found it much easier to find myself in a romantic or sexual situation with a boy (not of course your typical macho straight male, but then gay bois can be pretty macho their ownselves) than with a woman. I feel intimidated by the prospect, I keep wanting the woman to take control and take the lead, and unless she's a domme that won't usually happen. There's this intricate dance of symbols and social motions which I have never been quite able to understand.

I think I've got a bit off topic here. These are my feelings, however, I myself am more an equalitarian than a feminist. Whenever I hear women say how much better they could 'run the world' than men, because they're more 'sensitive and emotionally balanced', I think of all of the petty catfights and little behind-the-back slights and exclusions and back stabbing that I see among female friends, things that just don't seem to happen among male society, and I think of countries having trade restrictions imposed on them and demanding a reason and hearing back, 'if you don't know why, then I won't tell you'... And it takes two to create life, no matter where that life might happen to gestate. I think a lot of the tradition of 'chivalry' comes from the male knowledge that if all the women get killed, there ain't gonna be no more of us men... so go ahead, beat your wife all you want, in fact get two or three if you have the power, so your genes will have even more fertile soil to grow in, but for godsake don't let them do anything *dangerous*. Perhaps all of the little social niceties that develop from women to men came as a kind of compensation, from the deep down knowledge of how wrong it was to keep women 'in their place' and keep them from doing anything significant in life aside from birthing babies, 'so we should all be extra nice to them just to make sure they don't all snap and come at us with the meat cleaver'. Not an 'acknowledment of innate female superiority' but an 'acknowledgement that our presumption of male superiority is a sham and a fake'.

I actually get quite annoyed when I hear women bitching to each other about how terrible men are. This is social progress? I say, 'yeah, we're all scum, aren't we'. They ususally have the good grace to look chagrined, though of course they go right back to doing it. I get equally annoyed with men who tell anti-woman type jokes, but then I try not to hang out with that type of man anyways, since they're usually pretty homophobic.

Hi all,

Okay, Elizabeth, I'll go out on a limb. Although Carolynn specifically asked us not to feel obligated to defend our beliefs (or to ask others to defend their own beliefs), I'll make an exception, here. Why? Because this is a subject close to my heart, one I enjoy (regardless if anyone agrees with me or not).

"Humankind must learn to understand that all other forms of intelligence must be secondary to the developed humane, compassionate intelligence, for any form of intelligence that is not primarily implanted into a matrix of humane feeling and understanding is the most dangerous thing in the world...It is (compassionate) intelligence that the world will always stand in need of. It is that kind of intelligence with which women are so abundantly endowed. It is that kind of intelligence that it is their destiny to teach the world. "

From Ashley Montagu's The Natural Superiority of Women 1992, p.199 (originally published in 1953)

According to Montagu, the main reason women are so well-endowed with "compassionate" intelligence is because of the initial mother-child contact. During pregnancy, women carry within them another human life. They must live, and think, and act, and feel, for two people. They must love a life more than merely their own. There is no more intimate a human contact than this. A close second is this: the very real physical contact between mother and newborn, through breastfeeding or in other "skin-to-skin" ways. Contrast this with men's uneasiness around this tiny new life ("Me? You mean, you want me to change her diaper??!!?!").

This initial contact is what gives women their natural superiority. They're not superior in the physical sense nor in the social sense nor even in the cultural sense (I think it can be shown that there exist sufficient examples to the contrary so that we can admit that one sex doesn't necessarily trump the other in any of these senses); no, it's through this general experience that is open only to women--pregnancy, this ultimate intimacy with another human being--that women gain an edge that can have "saving" consequences for the human species. Generalizations taken into account, women, on the whole, have a better "understanding" of what it means to care for a life (and for life itself) than do men.

That doesn't mean that men can't learn to live by a "more-female-than-male" ethics of inclusion. It just means that it doesn't appear it comes naturally to us. Men often organize their experience of reality in terms of rights and principles--for example, the Ten Commandments, the Code of Hammurabi, the Magna Carta, the United States Constitution, the United Nations Charter of Rights, etc.--whereas women are (again, usually) less principle-driven and more "consensus-care"-driven... something their close link with the life that grew within them and with the care they need to provide to a new and very much helpless human being "teaches" them is "right." They have the power to "humanize" humanity because of this. If we could but listen and learn.

Even here, on the forum, we sometimes have all-out arguments because one "opinion" clashes with another and then much energy is spent on trying to iron out or resolve those differences in worldviews and principles. It's a very male thing to do. And such are the things that lead to conflict and to war. "My way is right; your way is wrong. And my way will prevail." Women (again, generally speaking) don't do this. Their take is this: "Regardless of whose principles are right or wrong, in what way can we insure that suffering is minimized and that self-actualization potentials are maximized--for everyone involved?" (For those of you interested in exploring this thesis, look up Carol Gilligan's In A Different Voice. It's very much worth it.)

As to the question of "it takes two to tango," well, even that no longer holds true. We are in a position today where we could witness the utter disappearance of the male and still the human race would go on. It's called parthenogenesis, a process whereby nothing is required for the creation of a human being other than an ovum. No, it wouldn't be "natural," true. But the possibility is there. Also, left to itself, nature tends to produce a female; much endocrinological tweaking has to occur in the womb for a human foetus to masculinize. And, as many a trangendered person will tell you, it's a process apt to be sidetracked.

I think Freud had it all wrong when he postulated a "penis envy" in young girls. He was guilty of the grossest form of psychological projection (no doubt abetted by the Victorians' dim view of women); it's rather more the case, I think, that men suffer from a generalized (yet repressed) "womb envy." We wish we had access to that ultimate closeness with life itself that is the exclusive domain of women. In fact, couldn't this envy account for the prevalence of male-to-female transvestism and transsexualism over the female-to-male variety? Something to ponder.

Anyway, again, this is just an opinion of mine. It's not set in concrete and I feel no special desire to defend it at all costs. I just enjoy the thought, I guess, that my friendships with women are based on more than just "opposite" sex tension (however enjoyable that tension can be).

Love,
CJ

Hi girls,

Great posts.

CJ, I basically agree with you on almost every point. I am not nearly as educated or elloquent as you, but I still believe it boils down to the fact that women are the "baby factories". They feel a human life grow inside of them, something I have witnessed and marvled at. I for sure have "womb envy" and it does not surprise me that many women have post partem depression after having the baby separated from them physically.

With all my children I either witnessed them being born and held them only moments after coming into this world, or still seen them and held them within a few minutes of them being born, when I was not permitted to witness the cesarian birth. I took turns with feedings including night feedings, and changings, and bonded with all my children as a result. I have seen first hand this incredible thing, and I really do believe that this basic instinct to put the survival of our species ahead of ideals is what makes women superior, and has a great deal to do with the survival of mankind, to this point.

Love always,
Elizabeth

What makes us think that, if two things differ, one is necessarily better than the other?

-Celia

Celia wrote:What makes us think that, if two things differ, one is necessarily better than the other?

-Celia

Amen sis!!!! I couldn't agree more.

Hugs,
Stef

Thanks, Stef.

-Celia

CJ: I am not trying to be argumentative or raise temperatures here; I just have a few points I'd like to make (in the most polite and non-judgemental manner possible, yep, I'm just sweet as maple syrup I am...)

Men often organize their experience of reality in terms of rights and principles--for example, the Ten Commandments, the Code of Hammurabi, the Magna Carta, the United States Constitution, the United Nations Charter of Rights, etc.

People need broad principles as much as they need warm, fuzzy generalities. Of course, among said general principles might be such as 'attempt to compromise where feasable' or 'learn to listen to emotions, not just words' (two things I struggled to learn in my communication classes). But without law, all is anarchy and discordia, and no social progress whatsoever can be made - the situation is ripe for the great 'male principle' of 'might makes right' to take hold.

Even here, on the forum, we sometimes have all-out arguments because one "opinion" clashes with another ... It's a very male thing to do ... Women (again, generally speaking) don't do this. Their take is this: "Regardless of whose principles are right or wrong, in what way can we insure that suffering is minimized and that self-actualization potentials are maximized--for everyone involved?"

Boy howdy, have I been hanging out with the *wrong* group of females! Maybe it's the fault of the peculiar gothik niche I inhabit, but most of the women I know (generally speaking) seem to find it very difficult to back down once they've taken a position. Worse, instead of giving 'honest opposition' and putting the disagreement out in the open, they attempt to undermine their opponents behind their backs, stooping in some cases to quite disgustingly underhanded tactics such as breking up relationships or getting people jailed; in the best of cases thay will not display disagreement or anger to the person with whom they have a conflict but will express it quite vocally to common friends; and when forced into a debate by circumstance, they will argue in highly emotional, generalized, and personal terms, assuming facts without proof, making blatant errors of logic, and resorting to personal attacks or changing the subject when their position has failed to hold water. And, I will add a corollary: it seems that most of the time, when men's arguments get out of hand and lead to violence or even war it's because the participants have become too - well - emotional?

It's called parthenogenesis, a process whereby nothing is required for the creation of a human being other than an ovum.

Which would lead to a pretty stagnant gene pool, pretty darn quick... there are solid evolutionary reasons for sexual reproduction and sexual dimorphism. Otherwise we'd all be neuters.

Personally, I enjoy a good, healthy debate; and even when tempers run high I like to think I retain my clarity of logic. But feel free to respond, or not, as you choose. Yep, we're all just a big happy family here in the Shire...

No...is my answer to that question!

I do not believe that women are more compassionate, or even

on the whole, have a better "understanding" of what it means to care for a life (and for life itself) than do men.

What can be more compassionate than a man being 'hunter/gatherer' and providing for his family?

What can be more compassionate than men laying down their lives so that women and children can be saved?

I know men and women are different in a lot of ways, but I really have never thought of men as less compassionate, I could probably think of whole realms of examples to prove my point (but I won't ) I certainly do not believe women have exclusivity on 'caring' just because we can reproduce and breastfeed...I have done both and I can assure you that I am no more compassionate or caring than the next person because of it. (Though of course I care passionately for my husband and daughter, I don't want any misunderstandings here!)


I do not believe that women have any more features than men that in any way make us 'superior'. I have said this before and I will say it again ... men and women have far more similarities than differences and that good qualities do not =feminine and bad=masculine.


Love,
Curly(SO)

Hi girls,

My opinion is obviously skewed by the fact that I desire to be female. Either that or my beleif that females are superior is what makes me desire to be female. Either way, it appears I am in the minority. But none the less, I do love hearing everyones opinion on this.

Love always,
Elizabeth

Stef wrote:Hi!

My personal opinion is the everyone is equal. Women have their strong points as do men and vice versa.

Hugs,
Stef

Beauty

Curly(SO) wrote:No...is my answer to that question!

I do not believe that women are more compassionate, or even

on the whole, have a better "understanding" of what it means to care for a life (and for life itself) than do men.

What can be more compassionate than a man being 'hunter/gatherer' and providing for his family?

What can be more compassionate than men laying down their lives so that women and children can be saved?

I know men and women are different in a lot of ways, but I really have never thought of men as less compassionate, I could probably think of whole realms of examples to prove my point (but I won't ) I certainly do not believe women have exclusivity on 'caring' just because we can reproduce and breastfeed...I have done both and I can assure you that I am no more compassionate or caring than the next person because of it. (Though of course I care passionately for my husband and daughter, I don't want any misunderstandings here!)


I do not believe that women have any more features than men that in any way make us 'superior'. I have said this before and I will say it again ... men and women have far more similarities than differences and that good qualities do not =feminine and bad=masculine.


Love,
Curly(SO)

Hi Curly,

That was really very well stated.

I will say that wives are usually smarter than husbands. That was a joke, but at times I wonder!

Beauty