[Buddha-l] Re: [Buddha-l ribbing ( Gender on Buddha-l)

[Mike Austin]

In message <1aa.408123b4.307e24f1 at aol.com>, StormyTet at aol.com writes

>I appreciated Mike and Richards accounts of
>the normalcy of this way of relating because I have had men in my life
>who viewed this as "normal.'

In my family, this is 'normal' - male and female alike.  In fact, I spar 
about with my sisters most of all.


>They have had quite a problem with my view
>that such 'humor' is not 'funny.'  Respect to me means building an
>entirely different kind of humor. I have developed this type of humor
>with key men in my life.

When I spoke of people not appreciating such sparring, I was thinking of 
a few men in particular, but I can also recollect women as well.


>My point is that I KNOW BETTER than to accept ribbing as the only way
>men can relate. It is harmful to women who are not into 'ribbing.'

I don't think anyone was suggesting that this is the only way. It is one 
way, and there can be advantages to this as I have previously mentioned. 
It could be 'harmful' to anyone who is not disposed to it,  whether male 
or female. I don't like to discriminate between them. I think one should 
decide according to the individual. Conditioning oneself otherwise would 
tend to have an adverse affect on cultivating compassion, I feel.

Another point here  is that one should be careful of making distinctions 
oneself and then suggesting that it is others that are doing it. I don't 
say this always happens, but one should be aware of the possibility.


>The
>very idea of ribbing presupposes a form of violence  that  is cultural
>and can be changed.

That is your supposition. When one plays sport, there can be a roughness 
that could be viewed as a form of violence. In earnest debate, there may 
be something similar. But characters are tempered by such activities. If 
they are pursued in an environment where one knows there is no malice, I 
think there can be benefits. We help one another train in this way.


>The import of this issue to Buddhism is  our mental frames.

I also think the issue is one of Right Speech. Some of the language used 
may not, on a strict analysis, fall into this category.  However, with a 
good motivation, maybe Right Speech could be interpreted differently.


>Stormy

(PS What is your real name - not Gail by any chance?)

-- 
Metta
Mike Austin