(no subject)
Mar. 6th, 2005 12:19 pmWell, I had a good time at
ladysea's birthday party. I was the only one from my household who made it, and I almost forgot her present and also almost got hit by an elderly driver who had not spotted the lane markings on Duckwood, but once I was there, I got my lap held down by one or more puppies and got to hear Mr. Spud marvel at the balloons ("Ball? Ball? More? Ball?") and generally had fun.
I read my tenth Ellis Peters/Edith Pargeter book today, to go back to that meme. It was Dead Man's Ransom, and it was a fine example of its type. Now I'm on to
sartorias's Wren's Quest. For some reason I'm on a short book kick in the last few days. I'm waiting for Connor to turn more people into turtles. That's what I really want out of this book: turtles. We'll see if I get it.
I'm planning to talk to my parents and go get my back fixed (the massage kind this time, not the chiropractor kind) and maybe run an errand with the
timprov if he's feeling up to it.
markgritter is, despite what he will tell you, sick. I managed to dodge T's last cold, so let's see if I can dodge two in a row.
My book was remarkably well-behaved yesterday. I'm growing increasingly suspicious of its good behavior. I suspect that this means that the revisions I'm making are making things worse, not better. I guess we'll find out later.
I think I found Web of Angels more satisfying than a lot of cyberish things because I find Mr. Ford's points of conflict with The System -- with systems in general -- a lot more compelling than I find most of the cyberpunk rebellion ideas that came after him, and because there was more than that to it.
Everybody seated? Good. Here is my stunning revelation:
Men have hormones.
No, wait, I'm not done shocking you yet.
Men's hormones are not at identical levels every day.
Everybody caught their breath now? Seriously, this should be a point of sarcasm, because we all know this, right? We all know that we vary from day to day. People's weight fluctuates a bit. Their sleep and their need for sleep fluctuates. Their mood -- some people are remarkably even-keel, but almost nobody is in exactly the same mood every day. Not all of this is hormonal, but some of it is.
But women have a very clear marker for hormone cycles, and women have social support for sharing data. Men don't have either. I think the latter is a big disadvantage for men. As alarming as the stream of data about menstrual troubles and childbirth and menopause and breast cancer can get in excess, we at least find out more about each other's experiences, so when something happens to us, we have a better chance of spotting it for what it is. Would men live longer on the average -- closer to women's average lifespan -- if they talked to each other more about their health? Maybe not, but I hardly see that it could hurt.
I think it's important to remember that "we don't take a lot of data on that question" is not the same as "this has no effect on anyone's life." But discussions of male hormones are almost all about sex drive, and almost all general, not about small local variations. I think that does everybody a disservice. And then hosers can come around suggesting that women's hormones make them unsuitable for this and that and the other. Men have hormones, too. Men are not a default neutral from which variations (women) are measured. Men have their own ups and downs and their own brain chemistries and body chemistries and, yes hormones, evil, nasty, horrible hormones. Some of which probably make it much harder to do work in the hard sciences, but somehow some of the poor dears choose to struggle on. Just like some women do. Go figure.
I read my tenth Ellis Peters/Edith Pargeter book today, to go back to that meme. It was Dead Man's Ransom, and it was a fine example of its type. Now I'm on to
I'm planning to talk to my parents and go get my back fixed (the massage kind this time, not the chiropractor kind) and maybe run an errand with the
My book was remarkably well-behaved yesterday. I'm growing increasingly suspicious of its good behavior. I suspect that this means that the revisions I'm making are making things worse, not better. I guess we'll find out later.
I think I found Web of Angels more satisfying than a lot of cyberish things because I find Mr. Ford's points of conflict with The System -- with systems in general -- a lot more compelling than I find most of the cyberpunk rebellion ideas that came after him, and because there was more than that to it.
Everybody seated? Good. Here is my stunning revelation:
Men have hormones.
No, wait, I'm not done shocking you yet.
Men's hormones are not at identical levels every day.
Everybody caught their breath now? Seriously, this should be a point of sarcasm, because we all know this, right? We all know that we vary from day to day. People's weight fluctuates a bit. Their sleep and their need for sleep fluctuates. Their mood -- some people are remarkably even-keel, but almost nobody is in exactly the same mood every day. Not all of this is hormonal, but some of it is.
But women have a very clear marker for hormone cycles, and women have social support for sharing data. Men don't have either. I think the latter is a big disadvantage for men. As alarming as the stream of data about menstrual troubles and childbirth and menopause and breast cancer can get in excess, we at least find out more about each other's experiences, so when something happens to us, we have a better chance of spotting it for what it is. Would men live longer on the average -- closer to women's average lifespan -- if they talked to each other more about their health? Maybe not, but I hardly see that it could hurt.
I think it's important to remember that "we don't take a lot of data on that question" is not the same as "this has no effect on anyone's life." But discussions of male hormones are almost all about sex drive, and almost all general, not about small local variations. I think that does everybody a disservice. And then hosers can come around suggesting that women's hormones make them unsuitable for this and that and the other. Men have hormones, too. Men are not a default neutral from which variations (women) are measured. Men have their own ups and downs and their own brain chemistries and body chemistries and, yes hormones, evil, nasty, horrible hormones. Some of which probably make it much harder to do work in the hard sciences, but somehow some of the poor dears choose to struggle on. Just like some women do. Go figure.
no subject
Date: 2005-03-06 07:09 pm (UTC)What I've especially never understood about the stupid idea that women's hormones make them less suitable for [fill in the blank] is that even if--if!--it were true for some stages of the cycle, that wouldn't mean that they might not be *more* suitable at other stages of the cycle. Sort of like studies that suggest that workers are more productive on average when they have vacations and less stressful schedules, instead of just producing producing all the time. (To say nothing of preferring to have an erratic smart woman on the job instead of a stably dumb guy. That's why one has colleagues in the workplace: to smooth out the irregularities most of us have...Lord knows that's why *I* need colleagues.)
no subject
Date: 2005-03-06 08:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-06 07:51 pm (UTC)Sing it, sister!
no subject
Date: 2005-03-06 08:25 pm (UTC)In humans, it's female.
And there have been a lot of studies done on hormonal fluctuations in males, who have progestins and estrogens just as females have testosterone and other androgens. And studies of mood as it relates to hormonal fluctuation.
A lot.
But none of them, NONE of them, seem to be fodder for NBC Nightly News the way that 'Prozac as a PMS drug' was.
We DO have a lot of data.
We just don't talk about it. :P
no subject
Date: 2005-03-06 09:00 pm (UTC)But yes, we should use the data we have. Sigh.
no subject
Date: 2005-03-06 08:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-06 09:00 pm (UTC)Or not. That'll be fine, too.
no subject
Date: 2005-03-06 09:32 pm (UTC)Actually, it's probably most noticeable if they have acne, but how many teen boys don't? Sheesh.
no subject
Date: 2005-03-06 10:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-06 10:18 pm (UTC)Having had four teenagers, I wish we had bought stock in whatever company makes Clearsil. Or Retin-A.
no subject
Date: 2005-03-07 12:06 am (UTC)Of course, for me puberty was the farthest thing from uneventful. I grew six inches in six months when I was ten, and I got boobs essentially over one weekend. It's hilarious to listen to the guy who was my best friend at the time talk about coming to school that Monday. There's sort of a religious tone to his voice that just cracks me up. But no one has been disputing that girls can have some dramatic pubescent stuff going on, so.
no subject
Date: 2005-03-07 02:43 am (UTC)My experience has been a bit different: in contrast to the stereotypes (and also the real people) who say that women share everything, I've often been surprised at how much we *don't* share. For instance, when I had dysplasic cervical cells removed via cryosurgery (translation: they stuck in a speculum and froze off cells that were/were about to become cancerous) it was only afterward when I mentioned it to a few people that I sound a surprising number of my friends had had the same or similar procedures done. It would have been awfully nice to have known about it beforehand...
no subject
Date: 2005-03-07 04:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-06 11:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-03-07 12:03 am (UTC)At the risk of pointing out a small portion of the obvious, you are a good deal larger than the average 9-year-old boy. It took me some adjusting to get used to being 5'6", so it's pretty amazing to me to think that an additional, what, eight inches? wouldn't produce similar or even more difficulties.
no subject
Date: 2005-03-07 03:11 pm (UTC)*hugs*
Thank you!
no subject
Date: 2005-03-07 03:43 pm (UTC)