- We'll like to welcome you tonight to a feminist perspective. I am Walter Smith associate Dean of women, here at the university of Kansas. And I'm substituting for Dean Taylor, who is out of town. A feminist perspective is sponsored by the women's resource and career planning center, located in the Dean of women's office, 222 Strong Hall. The goal of this series of programs, is to provide a forum for women to speak publicly on issues of concern to them. However, this evening the microphone has been turned over to myself and four other men, who will discuss the male mystique. Tonight we hope to discuss several topics of interest. What does it mean to be a male? How do male roles interact with the goals of women of the women's movement? Should male roles be redefined? One of the reactions of men to the new role definitions, that are somewhere being imposed on us, and some of which are out and choosing. How can men and women best grow together to understand their new roles? I'd like to remind you that we maintain an open line during our show, or during the latter part of the show, so that you can call in to ask questions of our panelists, or comment on the topic of the show. The number is eight, six, four, four, five, three o, if you wish to call. Tonight we are pleased to have with us four men, who represent various aspects of our campus. First of all, Dennis Daley, who is professor from the school of social welfare. Can you tell us a little about yourself, Dennis? - Well, other than the fact that I carry a full-time teaching load in the school of social welfare, I guess I'm here and involved in this program because I'm concerned about the issue of my own growth as a human being, and how that relates to the struggle for liberation be it male or female. - The second panelist is Bill Robinson, who represents them on other jobs that he's involved with the Dean of men's office. - Among others, I think my presence tonight is perhaps due more to the fact that I come in contact on a daily basis with a good number of undergraduate students at the university, through my contact with the college of arts and sciences I'm gonna make a college. And I feel as though I've had some experience with these people, these undergraduate students that suggest to me that the role indeed is changing for men and for women, and the impact of the changes or things that can be seen very vividly. In course planning major selections, vocational plans, and some of the kinds of things that I've experienced there will be things that I'll hope to be able to touch on later this evening. - Thank you. Third panel member is Alex Thomas, who's a student here at KU. - I'm president of the residence association, and my capacity as president I deal with the residents male and female of the system. And this capacity to come in contact with the Dean of men and Dean women's office and I guess that's one of the reasons why I'm on the panel. - Certainly we know Alex will make good deeds that he does very good worker. Finally, Deco Wemen. - I'm the swimming coach at the university of Kansas and also share a 50% teaching load teaching some of the aquatic courses, namely in our water safety program. I think there's been a tremendous new interest in women's sports and women athletics, and addition to of course trying to uphold a varsity program and in a collegiate athletic program of some prominence here at the university. And I think that to some degree there's been a struggle for some recognition that rarely it should come a little more naturally than it has to this point. Thank you. - Tonight we have a topic, "the male mystique", which has a lot of different meanings to a lot of different people. It could mean almost anything to anybody listening to the show. We found out as we talked about the topic before the show, that meant many different things to us. and thought that maybe we could share some of these ideas tonight about just what does a male mystique mean? How do we react to that? Bill, Can you give some reactions to that idea? - Yeah my immediate reaction is that the male mystique is a non-sequitur as a label. Frankly, I don't feel any more mysterious as a male, than I assume that that women feel as females. I think that in terms of its application though since admittedly it's an expression or a term that we can confront and live with rather routinely, I think the male mystique, is something that has grown at least in the way that I hear men using the term, in reaction to the women's rights movement or the equal rights movement. Perhaps it's come about for men it's kind of a defense mechanism to what some men are prone to call women's celeb. I guess I have a tendency to stay away or to avoid terminology like that. Simply because I'm not sure that it means the same thing to me as it would the other people who might use it or hear me use it. I'd frankly prefer to talk in terms of human liberation, basic human equality, and leave rather alone concepts as diverse or ambiguous in my mind as female mystique or male mystique. I think the term itself is the mystique. - My mystique. - Our mystique. Yeah. - Well, I think this to some extent what Bill says is correct, I think in many ways the concept exists primarily because it plays into the polarity that that is so often I think generated around the issue of women's liberation, and it's simply the label for the other side of the war. And I couldn't agree more with what Bill says with regard to the issue of human realization and human liberation that that's really where it's at. And yet, as we were discussing earlier, I'm I have a considered opinion that the kind of changes that are required, in order to make our existence somehow more human probably requires some kind of polarization before there can be any significant amount of meaningful change. And so, to some extent, the existence of the women's liberation movement is in my mind a terribly positive kind of thing. I think to some extent the men's liberation or the male mistake issue is probably also productive in that it does point out the polarity that frequently precede meaningful change. Again as we were talking earlier, I'm convinced that if the end goal of the search for human realization, were to be translated specifically into the goals of women's liberation, or the goals of men's liberation that it would be somehow a hollow victory for us to not move beyond the issue of men's liberation or beyond the issue of women's liberation to somehow and not to direct our attention to what it means to live together and survive as a humanity or as a human race, that the victory would be very hollow. And I guess it's for that reason that my own interest in the topic relates to relates less to the issue of masculinity or femininity then to the issue of how I can make myself a more productive human being, and somehow or another disregard to some extent. Role definition at the same time, be able to with some honesty pay attention to role differentiations as being real and viable. And not have to be, not have to feel guilty about either being a man, or to feel guilty about what the women's liberation movement might be saying to me. - Dennis's comment causes me to think of something that I feel very strongly, and that is that there are problems, that men must come to groups with Mister somehow resolve at a personal and at a group level. - Right - In order to be able to respond to the changing patterns of existences that involves male and female partners. So I really didn't mean to imply in my earlier comment that there is no problem. As far as men are concerned with respect to the equal rights movement or to the specifically to the women's rights movement. For indeed I think there are, I think that each of us here tonight I've come into contact with those a great many times. There are difficulties, there are problems and there are very special considerations that need to be made. But as far as those comprising of a whole aura or mystique, that leaves me really cold. - What yeah, I think another point with respect to that is the that the phrase, the male mystique, is so frequently cast in that angry defensive tone, that it establishes the war, between the sexes, and takes away from any kind of search that either relates to togetherness, or relates to something even more abstract notion of the human realization. And I think that I admit openly that I and all other men have been involved in visiting all kinds of oppression and women. And at the same time, I think it might be worthwhile to explore the fact that in the search for human realization, I as a male have experienced a form of oppression of the same order as half women. It's oppression no matter who it's directed at, who the recipient is. You know, to be told that I somehow another to borrow a Bill's phrase have to behave according to the you know, the John Wayne image of maleness, or that the only way that you can be male is to, you know to have bulging muscles and not to be concerned about things that are maybe more aesthetic or romantic or whatever. Is oppressive to me, in the realization of my humanity, as the same analogous situation is oppressive to the realization of a woman's humanity. - I would have to agree that the labeled of mystique female or male, something that comes about I think because of lack of communication between the two groups and may get some major defense mechanism that comes about it. You go ahead and label them, male mystique and the female mystique. - It's curious that men spend so much time talking to women and women spend so much time talking to men and that you could point up a lack of communication between them. - Right. - And indeed indication of the quality rather than the quantity? - Well, I think it's communication in different areas you know. The communication between the male and the female it's so restricted as to what they talk about you know. - What are some of these things? - What I think the main thing that is a problem between the two groups, is the main emphasis on sex you know between the two relationship between the two groups you know. And I think that's avoiding a lot of major issues that revolve around the two sexes. - Well, there are, you know we wanna get to much more specific about the kind of constraints on our role as men, with regard to how we relate to other people. Be it men or women. That we are caught in the same kind of role definition that can be considered oppressive, as is any woman. The notion that it is all right for women to gather around together in intimate situations, and discuss intimate topics, meaningfully with each other. And then somehow for men to be seriously involved in and discuss issues of intimacy about themselves, about their relationship about what they're feeling about what they're doing, about their plans for life, but somehow or another that becomes interpreted as non masculine. That again Bill was talking about this earlier, before the program, the sensitivity and I feel I guess I feel like I need to talk about this Bill. The idea that as a man, there are all kinds of role definitions that say that we should not have certain kinds of relationships with other men. That immediately, when a man says that he has a deep and abiding in loving relationship with another man, that he's immediately labeled as a homosexual, labeled as a fague, labeled as a weirdo or labeled as something other than what the typical role image for me would be. And that's a terribly constraining experience, to have to live your life being programmed from some external source that says, that having deep and abiding relationships with certain kinds of people involves certain kinds of rules. And that you, as a consequence then can't have a deep and abiding and loving relationship, you regardless of the sexual piece, with another male. And I find that very oppressive. And I'm sure that women who are told that they aren't supposed to be involved in athletic events, and women who are told that it is not feminine to do certain things that are significant to their existence, find that equally oppressive, and equally distant detracting from their expression of their humanity. - It sounds to me and talking here on the show and also talking earlier today, it seems to me that we're kind of crying out, that we're saying that there needs to be men's liberation as much as women's liberation and that we have to tie this all up together and call it human liberation. That when I as a man I'm not allowed to wear my hat on my sleeve, and I can't tell that somebody else know what my emotions are, because as a male, I'm just not allowed to do that. - Yeah when it's wrong for me to cry on movies. - Right. - When its wrong for me to respond to sadness and pain, right? - I think that shows the necessity of a man's who witness a men's consciousness. Why are we putting this in a stereotype role, where we kind of cry in a movie, or when we break up with a girl, you go out and you get drunk to forget about the whole thing rather than just sitting down and rationalizing what was wrong. The main incident major instinct is just go out and drink it under the table just forget about things. - And I'm just thinking back to a while when I was first dating the woman who became my wife, and just finding out that women could be express emotion so much that I had not seen the men express so openly. And that was not terribly eye opening, but it was a different kind of experience. - You mentioned the a change in labels to from female or women's liberation and men's liberation to human liberation, and something that Alex said triggered a response in me in terms of, I think what you said Alex was why are we locked into these stereotypes? Yeah true. - You're put into these stereotype. - I think like a good many other people, I spend some time being angry, and rather rebellious about some of the stereotypes that I felt locked into. And yet a part of me also wants to say it really don't make a bit of difference, why I'm into these stereotypes, my reality, or the reality with which you know, I confront the world each day. Says that, yeah there are some stereotypes that affect me and some them are very functional, very useful kinds of stereotypes, some of them are very oppressive, some of them are particularly distasteful to me. I think an emphasis that I'm far more comfortable with is, let's just accept the fact that each of us has stereotic kinds of responses that are patterned into our lives, and I'm very much in favor of providing the kind of situation or climate where people can look at those stereotypic reactions, and decide which are functional, which are dysfunctional, and for those that are dysfunctional which can be changed, and in which directions. And I think that's part of the description that I would have to own for myself in terms of why I am involved in you know, at a minimal level this show tonight, but on a more significant level for my life. Why am I involved with the kinds of people that provide and force an environment whereby this kind of change and re-examination and change and re-examination is very much an anger in process. - I think one of the difficulties, of course when you talk about human realization that it is almost as abstract and obtuse, and to some extent meaningless. As at the two other description that we're trying to that we're grappling with is having problems in male mystique and the female mystique. And I know that for many, many women and I think some men too, that the changes that that one hopes to achieve, are the kind of changes it will somehow be born out of revolution, out of massive overwhelming kinds of change that are generally the consequences of polaris kind of struggle. And yet, I think this is probably the same thing that Bill was addressing, is it? For me the struggle is not, it doesn't have anything to do with the revolution. It has to do with a very very intimate and personal struggle, that I become involved in as a human being. To be freed up, to use some of the positive stereotypes, that define my life, as Bill has suggested. And at the same time to free myself from what are for me, some rather obvious constraints, on my behavior. That for as I was telling you earlier first, to decide to type a letter in my office by myself, as opposed to having one of the secretaries do it, sit down at the typewriter and begin my work, and to have my fellow faculty members and secretaries come in and say, you know, with otherwise remarks about you look at the new secretary, isn't she sweet? I find that distasteful. And that it makes not only a comment on me, but all of those who are part of the context in which I work. And doesn't allow me to express myself as I said, she would choose to. And there are a lot of for me a lot of personal examples, of that kind of very personalized struggle, that has absolutely nothing to do with revolution, have nothing to do with radical movement, has nothing to do with being a member of a men's liberation or being a male member of the now chapter, or whatever that it reduces itself to a very personal and very intimate struggle with defining myself. - Excuse me, if we are gonna achieve anything and talking about this topic of human liberation a bit, the answer is gonna have to be forthcoming from individuals, and they're gonna have to be working out with the people that they come in contact with. That any larger answer to this kind of problems that are being suggested is not gonna come out of any mass movement or anything like that, but still we're faced with the reality of liberation. - Yeah I think that, yeah, And how we wanna talk about it, - Yeah and I see guys coming in and they are concerned about well, you know, why am feeling into this? They're concerned because they can see that many women are being sought after foreground careers. So I talked to people in the school of business, and I understand that employers comment very much. They got the women and the men are feeling it's a really tough job market right now, at any rate men are having to interact with this women's liberation. - I didn't mean by saying, that it boiled down to a kind of an isolated individual struggle. That the issue of the revolution is some are not that important, because it is important. I guess I'm saying that like I said earlier, the polarity is a significant, a significant thing. And as a matter of fact, it is, you know no change happens without conflict. No change that I can think of happens without some kind of conflict in relation to that change. And it is at that state that we are I think presently involved. And yet I think like most issues of mankind. At some point they reduced themselves, to the individual's personal struggle with that issue. And I think what is happening among many men, or at least I'd like to think that it's happening is that the consequences of the radical women's movement, the positive consequences of that, is that they have been somewhat freed up. To begin to think, about themselves. Who they are, who they want to be, to rule themselves out of certain roles that are constraining on them, to relate in ways that are meaningful for them. - Yeah, I think your emphasis on the personal level, is a good one, Dennis. And yet I also see it for myself as kind of a luxury. - Its a slow way to make change. - Sure, I'm male, I'm middle-class, I'm white, I guess all those things go together to give me some advantages. - Yep. - And until recently, those advantages have been very comfortable, very real, and I you bet your life I've worked on them to the best that I could. But your example of I'm going to go Walter of men finding themselves in a job market situation that is competitive at the very from the very outset, but even more competitive now, that a number of qualified women are saying, you know, you will not overlook me and you will not ignore me. That brings it home. Not only at a personal level for me, but also at a societal level. My privileged status or whatever, no longer means a great deal. - But no longer has the same meaning. - Yeah, It's no longer a privileged status. - Right? Yeah. - I am faced with a situation where a job market for me, would be far more open, if I were not white middle-class male. And that has some very real realities, I spent a good many years preparing myself, and gaining experience, to do the kind of work that I identified some years ago as being that which I wanted to do. And now I'm finding more and more frequently that some of the doors that would have been very much open to me, not only aren't open, but are closed and bolted from the other side. I think that's a reality that I have to confront more at a personal level, but not to the exclusion of realizing that societly, it has a base. - Well I'm thinking of the comment or Dick's being here. Suggest a comment to me that idea that I'm sure on campus there are a number of girls who would be particularly interested in being involved in a variety of athletic, competitive athletic, endeavors. And yet, to express that thing singly to any given coach. To express that thing singly, because it has somehow another bubbles up as a strongly and certainly felt issue for them. Is probably not going to get the kind of changes. - Sure. - But when Dick has 35 girls tangling to his office. And say, look, you know like I'm sick and tired of second class citizenship with respect to athletics. You have a new ball game. And I think at the same time, my guess is that Dick is very sensitive to how terribly some of those girls feel, that being cut out of some piece of activity because it's role defined is not appropriate. - Well I think that my position as a swimming coach, really probably would differ from the opinion of a lot of the other coaches for we grow up in age group swimming where half of our squads are female. And until they make the decision that there's something that they'd rather do, than pay the price that it takes to become good in the practices and what have you, they're every bit as much a part of the team scoring and the team picture as anybody else. And I think maybe it is their position in a social structure that they would rather do other things than to pay the price really to be good. But I can assure you this, if you do find, one that is not concerned about dating, or not as concerned, about some of these other things, but it is that keeps her interest in athletics. You have really got a tiger. These people and these girls will pay the price that most of your males will not pay. And the one said, make it on the big time level, lets say, national level Olympics are up there. They are ever so much as dedicated or more dedicated, than their men counterpart. And they're really going after it. And I think that in this day and age that there a lot of women's athletics is still at a club level, as opposed to being in an intercollegiate level, where they're moving around and seeking more outside competition. But I think it's a coming thing. And I think they're showing that they are competitive. If they do wanna get under the competition, that they do wanna have a chance to show their skills, and that they wanna do it, at a level of their abilities as opposed to just having it be with their own classmates, classmates at school. And I think funding, how are they gonna pay for this is more of a problem now than it isn't finding people, that are talented and gifted and interested, and really could do an excellent job with him. - I think we need a break here for a moment to give the chance for a station break. - Know anything can happen in a city the size of Lawrence. Some of these things you may like, others you may not. But it all has an effect on you. There's always a possibility that you might not even know about some things that occur in Lawrence, that could be of importance or of interest to you. Now, one easy way to find out what's happening in Lawrence and why, is to listen to the program City Limit. Aired on KNNU, Friday nights at seven. Bill Redland and Third Colander, you have been in Lawrence. Were there when things take place, and decisions are made. They probe what's happening in Lawrence each week, to give you a detailed report. Now whether it's funny or said, you'll hear about it on City Limits. City Limits, a place to find out about Lawrence and its citizens. We invite you to tune in Friday nights at seven, for City Limits. A presentation of KNNU Lawrence. Public radio serving you, with news about the area, in which you live. - You're listening to Jenny's theme. From the new motion picture, young Winston. It's the latest in a continuous series of contributions to the field of popular music, from film soundtracks. You can hear much more current to newly released popular music from films on popular music in depth. Each Sunday night at nine, here on Public Radio. Besides music from films, you'll hear a wide variety of other vocal, and instrumental popular music from record albums, together with information about the artists, and the music. I'm John's Seebreck, your host for the program, inviting you to join me. Each Sunday night at nine. For popular music in depth and full fidelity FM stereo, from the university of Kansas, KNNU Lawrence. - You're listening to a feminist perspective, from the Public Radio Service of the University of Kansas, KNNU Lawrence. Here again is Walter Smith. - Can remember our topic this evening on a feminist perspective is the male mystique, and discussing this topic instead of the usual panel of women, are instead a four men beside myself, Alex Thomas, Deco wemen, Bill Robinson, Dennis Daley. Remember that you were invited to call with your questions on our topic. Our number is eight, six, four, four, five, three o. Before we go on, let me mention next week's program. The moderator next week will be Jan Sanders and the topic will be, "our sexist language". Panelists will be Bonnie Patton, Jean Robinson and Liz. They'll discuss the nature, manifestations effects and means of overcoming our sexist language. And they define our sexist languages as, any language that expresses stereotype attitudes and expectations, or that assumes the inherent superiority of one sex over another. So we invite you to tune in next Monday for that. Before we go on remember, your telephone calls are invited at eight, six, four, four, five, three o. We're kind of talking about new roles for men, we kind get rid of male Mystique, ideal or tried to anyway, but we still always talking a little bit about men taking on new roles. They're not so concerned about the old idea of a heart on their sleeve, and so forth. Do we have any evidence that this is happening that men indeed are willing to play a new role? - I don't know, talking for both from the student point student level, I find it really hard to believe that there is a change at home as far as the perspective of men. On our system wide basis, I'd say about 90% of the people that, for example, the residence hall system, I don't see a change in the attitude, it just hasn't phased him to the extent of worrying about the new roles or not to put him on mildly. They just don't care about what the new role is. That would seem to suggest that it hadn't affected them, in any significant degree that they've been forced to care. - Like pro I think a problem with the question is how in the devil would you ever get evidence? That any kinds of changes have occurred? You know, you tend to relate to people who are very much like you. And I know that among my circle of friends, not only I think circumstantially, there is a fair amount of awareness and among many of those men, so deepen and interpersonal kind of struggle. But at the same time, you know, I still have to contend with the neighbor down the street, who goes into shock. When he experiences me doing some things, according to my preferences about redefining my role, aside from what women's liberation or men's liberation might have to say about me or for me. - Now, talking about the examples of the change you know is obvious you know, when you're living in the hall where you'll hear comments where, people would talk about being proud of being a male chauvinist. You know I mean, those sitting at the dinner table and hearing people just talk about just one topic and that's sex you know I mean, you begin to see the female and just the role of sex. - Of object - As the object. - We have telephone call I understand. Yes. Go ahead. - What do the panels think about game playing? I know that they've mentioned role-playing, but what do they think about game playing? - Game playing and in what regard if I may ask? In every respect, most obvious one that comes to my mind is the games that girls tend to play when they're telling the club get a husband. - I love that question. Is there more to the question or do you want some response now? - Then the other part is, well game playing is sort of an insensitive thing. Like there's a lot of roles in it but then how do they think that sensitivity towards people as individuals with their own wants needs desires? And of course they have their problems. How does that concept work in? - Well, I think I'd probably, probably be fair to say you know, life is a game playing experience. I think the issue is the extent to which those games that people play become dehumanizing, and in effect become somehow another oppressive. I think for example, you made an interesting, there was an interesting point in your question with regard to the image of women being on campus to play the game of getting a husband. I think there's a great deal within that it is terribly unfair, both to women as a stereotype and to men. To suggest for example, that it is only men who are here at the University. And in the course of that experience may meet somebody who by some kind of agreements they decide they wanna spend the rest of their lives with, is certainly. I think not just the concern of women in that respect that terribly unfair stereotype of women. The same time it's unfair to men, to somehow or another see them as being with respect to finding a mate. Has being totally like non-responsive to that, for unconcerned about them. I think there are many men you know, like the men that the girls on campus marry are the guys on campus. And I can't, I will not accept the perspective that suggests that men enter into marriage or enter into relationships. So flippantly, as to suggest that they have relatively little caring, or little concern, about who it is that they're going to spend some time in their relationship. - General example I'm sure it works both ways. - With respect to your general question as to the impact, I guess game playing. First of all, maybe I should say that game-playing per se, is not a negative thing in my mind. In fact, it's not a very positive thing. It's a very self-affirming kind of thing. I believe that all of us play games at practically every waking moment, perhaps even at some sleeping moments. I would identify game-playing as being very consistent and very close to role-playing. The games that I play are parts of me. And my primary concern is not with identifying the games, or deciding whether they're good or bad games, but deciding knowing that I am playing a particular game or role or being a particular way, because it's something that I need, because it's something that's an extension of my definition of myself, and that in some way or another it is helping to sustain and enhance that self. Is that speaking to the kind of question that you had in mind? - Basically. - Had a couple of thoughts that our reaction to the question. One is that there's a kind of implication that just suddenly struck me as I was listening to the call tonight. And that is at least in some respect, we're not condemning ourselves, we're saying that the men are guilty. And kind of like whites are saying whites are guilty. And so far that's just an implication that we're just living with guilt, and I don't think that maybe we should say that this is really a question of guilt or lack of guilt. We find ourselves in a particular kind of situation where men's roles are defined by the way we need to work out how we'll like to play the roles so it's not really a guilt question. Another reaction that I have to the question was that, in game playing there's something like an implication that men and women aren't honest with each other, and when they're playing games with each other, they're just speaking words that they think they ought to be saying particular situation, rather than truly reacting to each other. And I think that, if that's what game playing means, that people aren't honest with each other, but rather just mouthing words, that I deploy that kind of thing. - Yeah I'm really glad you said that well. I think that games can be very honest, honest in terms of the person to person level, the interpersonal level and honest in terms of what it's expressing of me, at an interpersonal level. And if honesty perpetuates or characterizes those games, then I'm all for them. I don't see any way to avoid them Franklin. - Okay then nothing comes round to the point of being, - That's right. - towards the other people's deed? - Could you ask the question again I'm afraid we didn't hear. - Then being honest with people comes around to the concept of being sensitive towards people's individual. - I would agree yeah. Being sensitive to people as individuals, as well as being sensitive to self. I think it's a good deal more that I have some ideas to what's important for me, to keep myself together before I make any effort to respond to your needs and what you've decided or I decide you need to keep yourself together. - Yeah. I think a kind of related notion to that or we may be getting somewhat a straight from the question as asked, is the notion that you know, a great deal of our existence is programmed into us in a variety of ways. And it seems to me that as one continues to grow and as one matures and develops, that the issue is to somehow another begin to make some interpersonal choices of your own with respect to who you are and what you are. And to somehow, another set aside some of those programming experiences that you've had if they are irrelevant to the way you would like to define yourself. Somewhere along the line, I think, and I think this bears on the game, I think the game playing that if the game playing is somehow an expression of who you are. And the games are essential to the sustenance of life or to the sustaining of relationships. And those kinds of games surely would be seen as positive. But there's a kind of a gratuitous assumption associate with that is that when you are playing a game, no matter what, that you have some sense of consciousness about it, that you understand both what fed it and what the consequences of it are. And of course, what that suggest is then a person taking charge of himself. Becoming you know, taking charge of who he is, by virtue of what he designs for his life. And somehow another disregarding some of the programming that we've all been subject to. - Yeah. Other words you're saying that if a person doesn't realize the total aspect of it they'll see to play a game and just loved the game? - Right. I think you know, if we accept Bill's proposition is as a correct one that is that game playing is a vital ingredient in life. And that issue is that all of life is somehow or another game playing, the issue is that some is positive and some is negative. But the only way that one then would be able to resolve that issue, is to take charge of that. To both be sensitive to what gave rise to the game, as well as to be sensitive with regard to the consequences of game-playing. And at the same time, to leave within that some room for individual judgment, with respect to how you wish to express yourself. So, you know, it's like there's an honest dimension in terms of games and a dishonest in intention. I think one of the places where the dishonesty thing arises most easily, is when a person shirks his human responsibility to be fully aware of himself. And the implications of his kinds of behavior on others. But that's the you know, it's like out of ignorance that error results that when you stop being sensitive to yourself and start playing games, without that sensitivity that you increased dramatically the potential that the kind of game plan that you're gonna be involved in is gonna be destructive to both yourself and someone else. - I know is that, somebody said, that law of our value, I think he's saying cultural values are programmed into it. - That's right. And ways to like programmed into it besides being raised as a child? - Oh, I think there are all kinds of ways in which we're programmed. Certainly not just from the context of family, but we're politically programs, we're economically programmed, We're programmed with respect to our role as men and as women, if you grew up in the last five decades you are programmed by certain kinds of theoretical perspectives on man, if you for example the ideas of Freud and some of those have programming implications, in other words we begin to act as we are expected to act. I think the issue is that we are programmed throughout life in a variety of ways. Some of which today, the consequences are that the programming doesn't fit. For example to be programmed over the last four decades, with respect to the John Wayne model. And we are doing I suppose an injustice to John Wayne tonight. But anyhow, program to express our masculinity out loud that kind of model, is today it doesn't work. It's not useful. Although I know that they're many many men, struggling ever so hard as I am probably struggling on the other end of the dimension to retain the John Wayne image of masculinity. - I remember an article that was in the Boston Sunday Globe, I don't have to read that paper regularly, but I have the article in front of me. Which is talking about men's liberation. And then the article concludes by saying, "a man to lean on." Well, today women are saying and sometimes screaming, but they don't want to lean, but to stand straight up on their own feet. The men's liberation says, "yes get off our shoulders you're too heavy. Stand up, let's look each other in the eye and maybe we'll see each other clearer." And that has some meaning for me. I frankly resist perhaps as a rebellious child in terms of transactional analysis, but I really do resist anybody standing on my shoulders that I haven't asked to stand there. - My colleagues its been that before all this won't deliberation came along was that Jones had a really good thing going. And I can't say how see the women's liberation movement pushed to the extreme that some of these girls are talking about. - And I think I let him, I think there was one of his questions. - Okay. - You were saying push to the extreme. - Yeah like the killing as radical, and some of the aspects like it seems to me that like woman's superiority rather than equality. - And that's unsettling to you? - They have some feeling to me is that they have basic biological physical limitations in this. They're trying to say the hell - I think the problem with your question with respect to women had a good thing going, is that kind of comment can is more than likely shadowed by virtue of its I say being essentially a masculine opinion or definition of what women had going. It's the same kind of paternalistic garbage that is associated with the issue of racism today. That a lot of men can't understand women's liberation because they can't understand how women could give up such a good thing, given their definition of good thing. And I think the issue is, that somewhere along the line men have got to or women have got to listen to the drum that they hear, in their heart and the men have to listen to the drum that they hear in their heart, and that we need to at some point stop commenting on each other. Stop defining for each other in what turns out to be I think a purely negative perspective. I think for a lot of women, the kind of advantages that you or others might see as having a good thing or a mile away, from the kind of thing that they would see is a good thing with respect to the expression of their humanity. - Your comment that until recently women have had a good thing going for them, which is then followed by saying that there are certain physical or anatomical limitations that are biologically present in women. Frankly strikes me as being in the same vein as someone telling me that, well everybody likes fried okra why don't you? I don't like fried okra because I don't like fried okra. And I decided that for myself. And I think that what I'd be looking for is an opportunity for women and men and small dogs and barricades, to be able to decide whether they've got a good thing going for them or not without someone else setting those limitations or definitions for them. - As a matter of fact, I think you know, it seems least for me it is out of that essential kind of paternalistic attitude with regarding to describing a good thing. Out of which so much of what is today seen as oppression has a reason. It seems to me that that's the seeds, of the kind of oppressive societal behavior. That present has resulted in kind of an explosion in terms of women's liberation. At the same time although I'm certain that for many the radicalized quality of the women's liberation thing is very unsettling that I still see it as essential to change. - I'd like to change the topic of discussion just a little bit. Now I think that we've all given some thought to what it means to be male today and so forth. What about some thoughts about some new role definitions? What one more thinking it would be kind of things are maybe not so it would a little bit closer to reality. What is the new kind of roles that we would like to see men playing? If we're gonna pick on John Wayne one more time, we wanna get rid of that image. Huh? What is it? Where are we going? And when we interact with other people, how do we. Well, particularly I'm thinking that many of us here interact with the students who are about to go out and work in companies or whatever how we'll talk to them about their new goals. What kind of things are we're gonna talk with them about? - I don't know if they have cleared with them. We all agree we should get personal level or a larger level, when we should keep it to yourself and when you're asked to somebody ask for your help, you give him the help or should we be spreading the word? It's a question that you know is burning my mind and I just. - Wait I'm trying to respond to your question, it's like almost an impossible question. And it would involve a tremendous kind of a head job to predict what men's roles, new roles are going to be or what women's new roles are gonna be. It's like for me, I find that a non-relative question. For me, the issue is to somehow another established, and I know this is idealistic. So establish some kind of an atmosphere on which that can grow. And that can be self-defined. And when something more than self is needed for definition where an individual can feel free to reach out to others for assurance, with respect to his definition of himself. Bill, you take a stab at that you're good at guessing. - But I to some extent I agree that's almost a non-relevant question, because it would be in terms of future impact it would be justice debilitating. - Now it'd be programming. Yeah Right. - For us to sit here and try to guess or in some way describe future roles as that would be as limiting as the roles we find ourselves in map. Which perhaps 10 years ago, somebody sat down and guessed it. In terms of a way that the new roles can evolve, that's something that I feel that I do have, some input into. I feel as though the way that I choose to live or the kinds of things that are important to me, you're directly help to determine what those future roles might be. - Yeah I think it's possible to respond to that question. You can aim that question right at me. - Like where I'm living. - Like what do you wanna be in 10 years? - Right you know, like if you if you put it right at that level, the answer is terribly relevant to me. You know like my own personal struggles with respect to this. I can address, but predicting for others I can't. You know, for me it's a struggle to feel absolutely comfortable. To be able to respond to my wife's request that I substitute for her at a Brownie meeting. And this feel with Brownie leaders in little Brownie is running all over the place. That I feel absolutely comfortable and in touch with myself as I do that. And I did that and it was a cherished experience for me. And did a great deal at a very individual level for me, in terms of coming to grips with some of the feelings I have, some of the ways that I express myself, some of the ways that I unconsciously behave in a way that is obviously so chauvinist. And these kind of repeated personal experiences, that I define for myself, and take on for myself, that helps me resolve the issue for myself. But predicting at higher levels of generalization at this point are well beyond. I just you know. - I don't think we can cryst the ball here, because anytime we cryst the ball I'm sure little crystal ball would be broken. But you know we are talking about the men can't show concern for each other. - Right. - And it seems to me that that implies we'd like to see men show more concern for each other. On the other hand, I suspect that we're concerned with the people making a living or whatever it is they're about and how are we gonna make that compatible, making a living compatible with showing concern when maybe the other person isn't into this thing about showing concern. - And one of the really unjust things that we have done tonight, is that we have somehow or another because of our zeal or because of the game we are playing right now. Ruled out that John Wayne stereotype as a non-viable role for man. And I you know, in one respect that is almost as dehumanizing, as some of the other kinds of oppressive experiences that were involved in. It seems to me that somewhere along the line we got to have enough room, for a man to express himself in as virile away as he chooses and to not have that be seen as negative. And at the same time, allow man the freedom to to do some of the things that he may decide expresses his humanity. And then we've done I suppose, John Wayne a great injustice, or that he made a great injustice because we have kind of operaly closed that out. We've said that's inappropriate bad. - I don't wanna say that. because I wanna keep that part of me that likes John Wayne just as alive as that part of me that just like Walter - Why? Absolutely. - And I'm both of those people depending on what I had for breakfast, Future roles I guess I am gonna forecast a little bit to the extent that I would like to see the way that I choose to live or be, have an impact on those people that are around me. I'd like to see all of that characterized by as close to total freedom of choice as possible. And I accept fully, claims that is a naive and short-sighted. - Idealistic. - Idealistic and all of that but that's fine if it seems naive, so be it. I still think it's highly desirable. - I think we've just gotten into the topic. At least I feel we've just gotten into it and just begun to talk about what's going on. And I'd like to invite anybody that's listening that wants to get their two cents worth into come on in and see any of us on the panel I'm sure that we'd love to continue talking about because it's not only maybe it helps somebody else get their head together but I'm sure it helped me. - I agree. - Just by way of announcement remember the next week, the topic is our sexist language, and I'd like to invite you to visit our library. That's you out there men or women, the library is in the Dean of women's office in 222 Strong. And there you can find materials on not only the topic we talked about tonight but almost anything else that would have any relevance to women and how we're trying to work with the problems that women in our society today. And bill tells me that he has announcement also that he'd like to make. - Oh sure my local plug, the Lawrence chapter of now the national organization for women is about six weeks into its formative stages. And it shows some promise for some exciting kinds of things to come. The next meeting will be at the Trinity Episcopal Church 10th and Vermont on Sunday, December 3rd, at 7:30 PM. And we'd be happy to see men and women childcare is provided free. - Thank you for tuning in tonight to a feminists perspective. - We will see you again next Monday at seven for a feminist perspective presented.