Good morning Fellow Wanderers…
I completed my fourth essay for HUMN 571 this week, using Margaret Mead’s Sex & Temperament in Three Primitive Societies as primary text with the assistance of Peggy Reeves Sanday and Francis L.K. Hsu as strong secondary sources. Once this session is closed, I will post my piece “Margaret Mead’s Hope for American Feminism,” but until then – my research presented interesting conjecture in regards to the abilities of human beings as separate biological entities, masculine and feminine.
The term “feminine intuition” has popped up throughout my life, but I had not – until recently – considered that this intuition is exclusive to women, hence, creating a proverbial chip on the shoulders of men whom are not, biologically, able to attain it. In this sense, “womb envy” may trump “penis envy.” Graver still as few are aware of biological indicators.
Do men have “masculine intuition” to combat the advantages in feminine consciousness, or are they immune to the pull of compassion? Experience says No, as I have witnessed compassionate males in action, yet…I wander…is compassion a choice? are males able to ignore their internal conscious easier than females?
Discussion much appreciated.
Hsu, Francis L.K. “Margaret Mead and Psychological Anthropology.” American Anthropologist, 82.2 (1980): 349-53. JSTOR. Web. 20 Feb 2016.
Mead, Margaret. Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive Societies. Ed. Mary CatherineBateson and Helen Fisher. New York: Harper Perennial, 2001.
Sanday, Peggy Reeves. “Margaret Mead’s View of Sex Roles in Her Own and Other Societies.”American Anthropologist, 82.2 (1980): 340-8. JSTOR. Web. 20 Feb 2016.