..... Bringing up the Gender question(s) ...


Yes in deed, if you have to bring it to that digital  (choice or turning) point of cause, we are mainly a (left-handed) girls' institution.

[Gaussian distribution: A little more men are taller than tall women, but a little more men are smaller than small Women, too]


But what the/which Bibel  compare e.g. jew-link http://www.beki.org/crossdress.html



«Nemo me impune lacessit» (no one harms me with impunity, Most Acient Order of the Thistle.

And yes, we do hold men in very high regard. Even if there may by some modification in case of an individual male behavior, we do trust in that part of 'menkind', too. And we don't at all expect boys to wear female clothes (here). Although wearing original kilts ourselves, and even uniformed - we appreciate variety. And, with our scholars, we do have some ideological-religious-cultural reservations about particular kinds of sexual thrill, too. But certainly not if 'in danger;' and we resolutely try to understand, how deeply affecting problems transsexual people can actually - but needn't to - have (which is, as everybody could know, quite different from 'travesty' in all its meanings and acts). Anyhow don't be too silly: No one will be able to estimate what sentence should(!) be passed on a naughty boy, of any age and status – insulting or harming womenhood(!), by what ever idea and/or use of powers on her(!). And, as a matter of course, we definitely do recommend as well as expect males to bow (their knees - not our backbones instead), too.


It all 'starts' (or 'ends up') in thought or thinking, which is quite different from our brains: Where male people may need an extra space for their additional four (to our 19) billions of nerve cells (the/ir cerebral cortex 'consists' of), by may that now be, nevertheless or even because of it at best, just the same average mind power as women have. Indeed a lot quite old traditions, educational and behavioural standards, as well / bad as diverse kinds of 'advantages' are involved – so that 'he' does, and has to, spread 'himself' out (much more than she'll be allowed to, in the big majority of known civilisations or at least cultures). Although the average man's body is already bigger ... they count more people at the extremum edges of the spectrums of almost every human items.  So, up to that’s,  way the skirts of females sometimes / ‘certaintimes  … ?


[Having a brain, and/or a living body, does not mean to be it at / after all]

Never ever  only meaning by biology, or mainly by / starting with physiology at all: Philosophy does expect, that there will/shell be some activity-change of brains / nerves in correlation with individual’s thinking – even harder to say / find out: what’s first, second / in what a middle or last, more or less etc..  Even much more important operatively if we expect / want / search for differences or e.g. similarities (as which, or as more of them, ‘emancipation’ seams us to be, too often misunderstood / discrimination is muddled up with – what für?)!

To express / develop / test our disagreements, sometimes we do use other / not established  words (instead of spelling mistakes), expressions as:menkind[men·kind || men'kaɪnd] (including human beings of all sexes and generations – not only just present ones?) and ‘menhood[men·hood || 'menhʊd] (broadening ‘manhood’ to varieties, not only adults included) more or less ‘masculinities’  not(!) versus more or less ‘femininities’, even of / by / as  womenhood[wim·en·hood || 'wɪmenhʊd] (instead of contrasting opposition, as complement/compliments?) in different dimensions (of interacting such as perception/s, Orientation/s and communication/s), opposed to  outworn, occupied understandings.








Inge Schwank 1986: "There exist two [sic!] different cognitive structures in which the thinking processes are expressed [sic!]:  One structure is built up by predicates (relations)  and the [sic!] other one is built up by functions (operations)". And empirically they shell often correlate with the sexes.

 Not completely ‘false’ – there are significant correlations of interaction-forms countable / measurable – and  not absolutely true’: both kinds of interactions (anyhow basically needed ‘structures’ to survive as individual being, too) are rather idealized extreme pols of at least one, or rather of different, communication-dimension/s, not finally expressing or resulting from, but ‘ways how’ / what cognitive processes  helps to takes place.













**But the Status Questions are even more ... what ever it actually may be.


interesting / difficult / unfair / astonishing / deadly .... / harder / trickier /





Some inequality is inevitable and ranking needn't be the necessarily result of it.















And there are a lot of differences, that often (but not for every individual) correlate with bio-logical sexes and/or socio-logical genders.

Scholars say, that just about 40 % of the ordinary human population are (more or less) pure male or female beings - according to the (traditionally) ascribed 'natural' characteristics; and the others are 'mixtures' somewhere 'in between'. Certainly not what may be thought by some guys, now - but: I.e. someone with an excellent three-dimensional sight (which is considered 'male') and an extraordinary social communication talent (considered as typical for women) in a let's say biologically distinctively male body.

[androgen & figure?]












More papers on that – in particular studies comparing cultural areas - are going to come.




Offences or exams wanted to do then.

Statistics show that, definitely existing, indistinctness on the biological-body level is mainly limited to effects as unwanted facial hair or on male mammary glands etc. (which are probably caused by individual hormone balances), but hardly concerns sexual organs themselves and luckily only seldom primarily sexual characteristics (but with than sometimes disastrous consequences for people).






[‘Right’ or ’wrong’ – it isn’t our country; neither are, good/male ups ‘yes’? and/or bad/female ups ‘no’? the only tow, completely all the categories of every logic]

Basically (reductional) hypothesis suspects, that the characteristics (rather 'male' or more 'female') of a person's mental abilities, depend on the temporary hormonal balance (how much of which sexual hormone is) in the pregnant woman, while this ability of the new brain is being developed. - Reality my as so often be a bit more complex (especially many parts of the, anyhow always developing, brain have to work together to generate anything, there seem to be very early 'non-sexual' genetic activity differences in all embryos and where do these just two  dichotome categories come from?), but that simple picture sounds quit vivid and could, at least, help to imagine 'way' people, even of the same biological sex, are - more than just a bit - different.












We could agree with a wording to be used, that distinguishes between 'characteristics rather attributed to men' from 'characteristics rather attributed to women'. And, may by, let's shorten to 'rather female' and 'rather male' or even ordinary symbols. Not just necessarily classical Mars and Venus sings of (medieval) astrology. But we do warn, not to associate or identify gender roles (too carelessly as natural) with the expectations of lingual genus (e.g. verbi) forms. - There are in deed some consequences to be discussed for the allocation as well as the esteem of duties!




‘Chinese’ spelling does ... with a human being plus her full (pregnant?) body versus his use of farm implement 'under' the rice field. - Mycenaean Greek compared shoulders, hips and had a, historically irritating, male dress code. - The antique Egyptian also had her dress and silence emphasised. - You may guess number four, the allegedly more basically, old Sumerian, yourself/ves, too.

The Passiv (Voice – the subject of the sentence is treated.)

The Active (Voice – the subject of the sentence acts.)

speeking / chatter / running commenting (sitting, svfn together)


thinking / looking (focused) / listenimg / acting (by/as walking)




feelings  / intuitions


rational calculation

judgement / inspiration שכינה


mercy  / forgiving / forgetting

seduction / temptation





simple / crude





Pure versions don't only seem to be impossible on either side of actually 'seamed'/existing beings at all.  






Let's try to compare comparable things (instead). What (kind of) empirical differences can we find? Some surprises included.


[To say / insist on ‘always, always‘ does mean / prove, that: There are exceptions]


We have asked the publisher of this site for some comments and O.G.J. remembers: «One student, who tried very hard to convince me of human equality - on lower and lower modalities. She finally ended up claiming, that the skeleton would be the same 'in' all people. And I could hardly curb my tongue, not to tell her, at least, one of the most obvious differences between her innominate bones and a male hip; not to mention age or feeding‘ differences etc. at all. Yes, she may well have thought of biochemistry but ... you already know – after all about allegedly Cartesian distinction between quantity and qualitv.»


 Physique: Bodies fatten up in different parts correlated with sexes.




Comp. VFB



 Sight: ‘Male’ trend to tunnel vision vs. ‘female’ trend to shorter but broader peripheral vision.







 Powers of imagination: ‘Male’ ones are more often associated with the ability to visualize (and hear) things in three dimensions; while precise and subtle understanding as well as linguistic abilities are more often correlated with womenhood.







 ‘Male’ eye-orientation versus ‘female’ ear-orientation. -- Men seem to be never still, they need a lot of motion, females don't (or are long traind/ f orced / used not to). - Poor good boys sitting still in their ordinary school (and office) desks.


But comp. that 'both sexes' are still 'perception-mixtures'.

«Doch hinsichtlich bewusster kinesischer Aspekte an Problemlösung(sstrategi)en: bewegen sich Frauen, nicht allein im europäischen Mittelmeerraum, eher (auch bzw. von sich aus) körperlich selbst - während Männer (sich andere - gar vorzugsweise Frauen - für sich) bewegen lassen.» (Insight by O.G.J.)







'He' is often disturbed in his actions, by (her, his own or someone's) talking. 'She' can, or is at least used to, do several things simultaneously.







John Gray: Male 'Marsians' (finally have short – maximum: four minutes – communication, to get a solution for a sadly too difficult problem) versus female 'Venusians' (happily talking with up to understanding each other – first or rather - to understand/find the problem as such).







It seems to be easier for men to ask questions according to logic while women prefer sociology as basis. (V.F.B.)







Robert Pul: Children study. - Gender role behaviour starts early (2 ½ years of age) with perhaps lower influence of examples at home than of the environment/society. (V.F.B.; O.G.J.)







Differences in care for dressing, cleaning, washing as well as body care.





«Das ist die Geschichte mit seiner geliebten guten Autojacke, die nach über zwanzig Jahren so plötzlich spurlos verschwunden ist. - 'Während' sie wiedermal vor ihrem durchaus vollen Kleiderschrank steht und wirklich nichts passendes anzuziehen hat. Oder: “Good night, girls, sleep very well! Boys, have you brushed your teeth, now!?“» (O.G.J.)


Learning with (not for) boys and girls alike - but in quite complex, individualized patens of mono- as well as coeducation groups, even of mixed grades/skills and ability - we realized that some particular boys have even worse educational opportunities than even deprived girls do – at least in contemporary Western systems / methodology.



Some studies show (not very surprisingly), that men can bring more short physical 'top-class' performance, while females are better at perseverance requests, just not to mention their much higher pain threshold.







Allen and Barbara Pease have listed a lot impressive observation in their Book: “Why Men Don't Listen. And Women Can't Read Maps.“ Just their answers don't convince us and women are not quite so good people, as the authors (like to) think.

Visiting the rest room, public toilet or convenience happens in female groups and for various reasons - if he goes at all, .... and some dramas at home are well known, at least in Western countries.

He rules the TV remote controle and zaps through all channels, while females are sometimes ready to watch some adverts, too.









There are some and more differences in male and female brain (parts), absolute and relative, size - but not actually in its construction as well as responsibilities. And there are, in deed, some puzzling pieces of circumstantial evidence. and even changes during live time, that can led to the widespread misunderstandings. Furthermore construction needn't determine equal development or use of skills and abilities.




Comp. «Denken».






















What is - anatomically etc. - comfortable for the different sexes surprisingly sometimes correlates with cultural expectations. And has a range of also paradox consequences. An, in her female manner, relaxed standing speaker, would easily by considered to be uncertain, even by Western women.




e. g. territorial behaviorems


The sexes do react differently on the same medication in several (non-sexual) organic contexts, such as in case of heart attacks. And this is the same in ethnical groups, who may indeed differ in pigmentation of their skins.












It (may be political or at least rhetorical - but it) is not very helpful to distinguish what is caused by genetics, biology et al. from leaned abilities! Neither side really puts away our own responsibility (If actually nature forces you to kill people, you shall still have to be hindered, etc. - in fact continuously. Even the best environmental conditions and optimal, models, teachers etc. do garantie for nothing.) - and, to be somewhat particular, it is impossible to diside that (at least for living creatures – compare the famous male crayfish experiment, already on the 'so simple' shell animale level) in a trustworthy manner. Furthermore we are able to contradict the current findings. And there is no need to imitate the sea horses.









«We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all human beings are created coequal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, we are called upon to find out without harming and dominating each other to death

Modified Declaration of Rights/Independence
(in Virginia - originally published 4th July 1776)

Take me back to the reception of your school


The choice is yours:   Is our world to be put in crude black-and-white terms – or is it still rather blue?








Quellen –
only in German











Goto project: Terra (sorry still in German)





to actual projects (German)

Comments and suggestions are always welcome (at webmaster@jahreiss-og.de)









to OGJ's home page






by Olaf G. Jahreiss, Virta and Cyberella of Paraggelia. All images - apart form advertising - on these pages are (if not noted otherwise) by courtesy of 1&1 puretec, fortunecity, marketsoft, StarOffice or our own. - last modification / zuletzt geändert am 19.10.2015.