I had an argument today about boys and girls, more precisely the existance of the difference between the two. Now I was arguing that part of the gender identity comes from genetics, and that boys are different from girls. Now, I admited that part of the identity also comes from society and education but there are still difference in gender beyond (and maybe reinforced) those of society. Now the argument continued toward the fact that we should not teach little boy the “stereotypical” male attitude of when you’re hurt you don’t cry you continu and do the job. My vision of the thing is that there are times to “cry” and times to keep it inside to finish what needs to be done until it is possible to “cry”. Some people can also keep things inside and then let them go, of course there are also some people that keep things inside and then explode.
Now someone argued that it was bad and that humanity would be better without that social phenotype (the guy that don’t cry). That is something I can’t agree with, I think that humanity need this social phenotype. There is a need (and a place) for people that will not stop and cry or explore their feeling everytime something “hurt” them and simply do the job that need to be done.
In a way I think that rejecting this social phenotype is rejecting the male social phenotype. I think that it would be a great lost for humanity and that it does a great diservice to future generation to try and make sure everybody cries and explore their feeling the moment things hurt them. Now I’m not saying you should encourage guy never to cry or explore their feeling, but letting it be ok not to explore them right away is probably not a bad idea, sometimes times is what it takes not crying. Oh well, I just had to rant about that conversation even if that rant ended up being confusing.