Generalizations: Are they inevitable?

Here's one I finally figured out how to articulate tonight.  How does it strike you?

“…Women tend to bring more consciousness to internal qualities.  Men tend to bring more consciousness to external qualities. 

Men will want women to describe the qualities they value in external units:  Do you want me to kiss you on the lips or not?  Do you like it when I touch you like this or not?  Do you want me to have a fat wallet and take you for a ride in an expensive car or not? 

Women will want men to describe the qualities they value in internal units:  Do you like art?  Do you want to make an important contribution to the world?  Do you desire my presence?  What do you want out of life?  Where are you headed? 

Usually we are each made very uncomfortable by these inquiries from the other.  Our consciousness is more comfortable elsewhere.  We tend to think we’re being set up or that the answer we give will leave us exposed and vulnerable.  This is very inneresting to me, and I must explore it.”

~Ww

sun says: "shade as well"

i say: ” what in me can trigger a girl's desire.” oh probably lots of things… but then i'm not a pri(n)ce; maybe charming. i have no money, i'm not a star, my music is somewhere between supernovas, cannot say heroic action easly. am not young anymore. social rule s drag on…
what fun then? oh, i say, i'm pretensious enough to find an amazing tale. just something that is bigger than now and more silent. this tinny, tinny wave  i see in the movement -blink of an eye- shoots me quitely with an invisible thing that creates another dimension of natural phenomens - powerfully -  letting love be born, create and appear… happens.

Re: sun says: "shade as well"

One of my favorite kinds of poetry is the kind that isn't immediately comprehensible and often comes in jabs or waves - advance, thrust, retreat…           curl, spill, withdrawl…         so your english limitations combined with your obvious desire to communicate are incredibly luxurious to read.  But I am unable to discern your meaning right away.  This causes a profound tension in me when I read you that I wish I could resolve.  But I don't know how. 

Excruciating!

~Ww

Re: sun says: "shade as well"

  i was away for long. how to answer, be clear about feelings and emotions? it seems clear to me but enigmatic like a good kiss. maybe that is the answer. this perpetual kissing of search. poetry, as kissing and searching do, teases the senses. perplexing emotions unexpected feelings. this is good and i ask myself in this little thing i wrote before : what on earth can a girl possibly want with me. more able to please in bed or in a cave diferent tastes for many ways. i tried to answer that somehow as a flower cave does. simply:  light is a luxury for sensitive beings

Re: sun says: "shade as well"

Excellent metaphor, kissing!

I experience curiosity for knowledge and understanding as a function of “Hunger”.  And I was just reading today about what “prehension” is.  There seems to be some disagreement, but according to Wilber it preceeds sensory input.  It seems to me that even single-celled organisms and plants have prehension because they can detect something good and draw near to it or draw it near to them.  This seems to be the lowest common definition. 

Kissing is like the urge to merge, expressed as affection - either sexually or familially or in a friendly way.  It is an external expression of an internal reality that is built into the very cells of our bodies.  The Maori and Eskimos rub noses. 

Worship is said to be “kissing towards”. 

Yes, it seems that a man is more likely to want to know what external thing they have or do that attracts the woman.  Women understand that men want the externals from them, but tend to want to embrace more internally.  Since the internal is invisible, it's easy to fake.  A woman will draw near to an internal good, even if it's a lie, and her externals are harvested.  Men who are ready to look at and value internals are difficult to find, but it may also be that they don't understand internals yet. 

All this is dangerous to talk about because they are generalizations - as the title of this thread suggests - but I think we should be able to ask the questions.  In truth, both men and women may not percieve the invisible internals yet, and this is a developmental stage event.  But it is also a state event.  The cues we need to detect goodness are stored at the sub-conscious level.  It is even instinctual.  Men tend to be more aware of the instinctual, women less so.  Women tend to intentionally trade more in concrete concepts.  I think this is why women prefer to avoid physical combat.  Internals seem to be more opaque to men, externals opaque to women.

Anyway…  as a woman, my thought on your question would be this: a woman may prefer to know your internal workings first, and then she assumes that the external stuff will just sort of take care of itself.  This may be a bad assumption, but it is one that a woman will tend to make.  Now that I look back at my marriage, I see clearly that my husband wanted to get our external stuff nailed down and then he assumed that the internals would take care of themselves.  Yeah, that ended badly. 

Blessings to you.

~Ww

Re: Generalizations: Are they inevitable?

genderalizations are inevitable for some people, both male and female. i believe that, for me, it is something i don't want to cultivate. i feel that everyone is androgyne, tho uniquely our own way.

i don't think it's a bad thing for anyone else to gender identify. but i view them as a gender-identified androgyne. therefore, i am superior. : ) …because i identify to my Full self.  that's a self-mocking superiority, as the universe is ever-ready to show me how quickly i am made less than superior.

i've heard so many gender generalizations, yet they don't ring true to me. i run them thru a belief system shredder, which is logic tool that says any belief system will arrange data into patterns according to that belief system, and when something comes along that might disprove the belief system, then that data is labeled ‘from a questionable source‘. maybe i did this so readily with male/female issues because there seem to be an emotional charge of frustration or shadow when i talk with gender-identified men or women who think they understand why the other sex is different. some is negative and some is positive shadow, but that doesn't matter to me.

one thing i like about wilber and integral theory (as i understand it) is that he starts out with the assumption that everyone is right. my interpretation of this is that everyone thinks and acts exactly right in regards to their particular stage of being. i/we/they may be ready to grow out of outdated beliefs soon, but until then the old one is right for now. the new and improved stage will blossom only when it is the correct time.