User Tag List

First 3456 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 56

  1. #41
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saturned View Post
    I wonder how much of this is embedded within language itself. I learned Japanese for a year when I was overseas, and was surprised to learn that there were certain words and modes that were only used by women or men. The one example I remember is that women are supposed to say "ohana" for flower instead of just "hana" because it its a softer sound... more akin to a woman. As my (female) Japanese teacher explained to us. I remember the (extremely) little Thai I learned had a very distinct female/male difference in words, etc.
    I have heard about those differences in Japanese. Many languages are much more strongly affected by grammatical gender. In Russian, for instance, if one writes "I went to the store" their gender is apparent in the word "went". We have very little of this in English, just the personal pronouns, and some words like waiter/waitress where we continue to use different forms for men/women.

    Quote Originally Posted by Saturned View Post
    It reminds me of an article I had read some time ago about how languages effect how we think. The example they used was having participants from a variety of backgrounds watch a video in which a lamp gets broken. Then they were asked what happened in the video. English speakers were apt to point out that "the man broke the lamp," whereas other speakers such as Japanese said "the lamp broke" with no blame portioned upon the man breaking it.

    I don't mean that aside as a derail but just as to how intertwined this topic seems to be... it's hard to grasp an edge of yarn to discern where the beginning is at.
    Language definitely is tied up with culture, being influenced by it, and in turn influencing it, or at least serving a significant means of preserving and propagating it. This relates to the idea of male and female culture as reflected even among English speakers, as someone described above.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  2. #42
    Entertaining Cracker five sounds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    729 sx/sp
    Socionics
    IEE Ne
    Posts
    5,634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saturned View Post
    I wonder how much of this is embedded within language itself. I learned Japanese for a year when I was overseas, and was surprised to learn that there were certain words and modes that were only used by women or men. The one example I remember is that women are supposed to say "ohana" for flower instead of just "hana" because it its a softer sound... more akin to a woman. As my (female) Japanese teacher explained to us. I remember the (extremely) little Thai I learned had a very distinct female/male difference in words, etc.

    I see way down at the bottom that this is briefly touched upon.

    It reminds me of an article I had read some time ago about how languages effect how we think. The example they used was having participants from a variety of backgrounds watch a video in which a lamp gets broken. Then they were asked what happened in the video. English speakers were apt to point out that "the man broke the lamp," whereas other speakers such as Japanese said "the lamp broke" with no blame portioned upon the man breaking it.

    I don't mean that aside as a derail but just as to how intertwined this topic seems to be... it's hard to grasp an edge of yarn to discern where the beginning is at.
    This seems cultural to me. Kind of like using different words or phrases when you're talking to someone of authority or higher social standing (usted vs. tu in Spanish). I don't know about Japanese specifically, but it seems to me that since their culture is so old, that they might have older and more traditional customs as they pertain to gender. I think that we probably do the same thing, but to a less obvious extent. I definitely think it's a common idea across cultures for women to behave "like ladies".
    You hem me in -- behind and before;
    you have laid your hand upon me.
    Such knowledge is too wonderful for me,
    too lofty for me to attain.

  3. #43
    Theta Male Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    CROW
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    9,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Good grief - I don't like smilies either, and don't care whom I offend by refusing to use them. On the other hand, I am quite willing to put up with those who do. I like to feel free to be me, and do my best to accord the same freedom to others. We don't all have to become best buddies, just get along reasonably and be civil.
    I suppose. I dislike conflict, and I find that making efforts to adapt to others resolves 95% of all interpersonal issues in casual situations, so I try to do it.

    As for the highlighted, I am a T woman and feel much more comfortable with what is usually termed the "male communication style", whether used by men or women. The main exception is that I have little tolerance for profanity, crude language, and baseless insults.
    I personally don't like conflict, but if someone insists on starting one, despite my best efforts, I have no issues with striking back.

    I'm fine with profanity and crude language, but baseless insults just suggest that the person has run out of things to say. At this point, it seems that they are determined to start a conflict. In these circumstances, I have no issue with giving them what they desire.

    Perhaps profanity, crude language and insults are concepts independent of Feeling or Thinking? And perhaps there is a gendered component to them?

    I'm going to pour over that Wikipedia article before responding to this thread again, because I think my model of this is insufficiently simplistic.


    When I am among largely female groups practicing "female communication style", it is like walking on eggshells, constantly having to pussyfoot around. In the best cases, it can still seem almost surreal.
    The interesting thing is that I often feel this way when I'm surrounded by men who are feelers (probably mostly introverted feelers). They'll express outrage at something, for instance, and when I don't understand the outrage, and express that, I find that I have to handle that very carefully. The mistrust that grows in the room is palpable.
    [Trump's] rhetoric is not an abuse of power. In the same way that it's also not against the law to do a backflip off of the roof of your house onto your concrete driveway. It's just mind-numbingly stupid and, to say the least, counterproductive. - Bush did 9-11


    This is not going to go the way you think....

    Visit my Johari:
    http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

  4. #44
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    As for the highlighted, I am a T woman and feel much more comfortable with what is usually termed the "male communication style", whether used by men or women. The main exception is that I have little tolerance for profanity, crude language, and baseless insults. "Your solution is idiotic because of x, y, and z", on the other hand, is OK. This style has been the norm throughout my education and professional life, and always seemed to reflect the "natural me". When I am among largely female groups practicing "female communication style", it is like walkingn on eggshells, constantly having to pussyfoot around. In the best cases, it can still seem almost surreal.
    I hate that feeling. It's like...nails on the mind.

    Always induces a desire in me to say something just to provoke them, so then at least I could feel more relaxed. I have wondered on whether or not there is some intrinsic psychological barrier between myself and individuals who give me that sensation, as if we are already on different perspective clouds before we even begin and trying to leap between them is some insurmountable challenge, unless I were to rock the waters retained in their cloud and start a dialogue free of that 'pussy footing' pressure.

    Maybe it is judgement on both sides that creates this barrier?

    Frankly I just want to feel free to be myself in any given situation, unfortunately social pressures are never that simple and it is not so much what people think, as much as how they act based on what they think. The amount of conflicts I have had to endure in my youth simply because someone disliked my way of being, even though I was not infringing on their own freedom, has taught me that it is worth sticking to your guns on that principal alone. Although I sometimes feel hypocritical since I am not always free and easy in my mannerisms, perhaps because I am quite strongly Fe influenced and therefore aware of the social standings in a group.

    Incidentally I read most of that wiki article you linked at the start this morning, but I was suddenly reminded by my phone alarm that work was a 'beckoning.

    In any case I found it very interesting and informative. I was reminded by this thread on something my employer and I were having a conversation about at my second job helping with some accounting. Essentially she told me when writing an email requesting payment, ( or any other question or request), of an invoice to a customer, always ask the males would you? and the females could you?.

    I queried her about this since I didn't understand the significance straight away. She pointed out that if you ask a man if he could do something then to most men it sounds like a challenge to their competency but if you ask most women if they could do something that is a polite question asking if they would be so kind.

    In the reverse asking a woman if they would do something sounds demanding whereas to a man it sounds like a directive. Of course I don't believe it works as a general rule and my boss said she didn't really care for social norms, but it is an interesting idea and at the least it works most of the time when trying to get response to something urgent to do with invoices.
    'One of (Lucas) Cranach's masterpieces, discussed by (Joseph) Koerner, is in it's self-referentiality the perfect expression of left-hemisphere emptiness and a precursor of post-modernism. There is no longer anything to point to beyond, nothing Other, so it points pointlessly to itself.' - Iain McGilChrist

    Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
    "Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
    Piglet was comforted by this.
    - A.A. Milne.

  5. #45
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    I suppose. I dislike conflict, and I find that making efforts to adapt to others resolves 95% of all interpersonal issues in casual situations, so I try to do it.

    I personally don't like conflict, but if someone insists on starting one, despite my best efforts, I have no issues with striking back.
    Nor do I. Like you, I don't like conflict, but find it hard not to be myself. Usually my accommodation involves simply keeping my mouth shut, or letting someone else have their way when it is not really important. I do believe in picking one's fights. At the same time, people will find me remarkably accommodating of their individuality. Many things that others will judge someone for seem unimportant to me, as long as the person acting in a constructive and considerate way.

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    I'm fine with profanity and crude language, but baseless insults just suggest that the person has run out of things to say. At this point, it seems that they are determined to start a conflict. In these circumstances, I have no issue with giving them what they desire.

    Perhaps profanity, crude language and insults are concepts independent of Feeling or Thinking? And perhaps there is a gendered component to them?
    Perhaps. To the extent that my communication is colored by gender, this is probably its strongest influence. I know men, though, from whom I have never heard vulgarity or "bad" language, and plenty of women who can cuss with the best of them. I don't like this from either sex. It's not that I find it immoral or unlady/gentleman-like, it is just ugly, conversational noise.

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    The interesting thing is that I often feel this way when I'm surrounded by men who are feelers (probably mostly introverted feelers). They'll express outrage at something, for instance, and when I don't understand the outrage, and express that, I find that I have to handle that very carefully. The mistrust that grows in the room is palpable.
    I would probably be confused by men who spoke using the feminine model, since I would be expecting the opposite. The few F men I know don't seem to do so, but we interact at work, and professional communication in my field tends to follow the masculine model, for everyone.

    Quote Originally Posted by AffirmitiveAnxiety View Post
    Incidentally I read most of that wiki article you linked at the start this morning, but I was suddenly reminded by my phone alarm that work was a 'beckoning.
    There are much better references out there. I linked it just to start the ball rolling. The one from Nicolita seems very comprehensive, but it may be awhile before I have time to dig into it.

    Quote Originally Posted by AffirmitiveAnxiety View Post
    In the reverse asking a woman if they would do something sounds demanding whereas to a man it sounds like a directive. Of course I don't believe it works as a general rule and my boss said she didn't really care for social norms, but it is an interesting idea and at the least it works most of the time when trying to get response to something urgent to do with invoices.
    Sounds like much ado about nothing to me. I would write "please send your payment promptly" or "we will expect your payment by [date]" to both men and women, but that's probably not "nice" enough for anyone who worries about would/could.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  6. #46
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Sounds like much ado about nothing to me. I would write "please send your payment promptly" or "we will expect your payment by [date]" to both men and women, but that's probably not "nice" enough for anyone who worries about would/could.
    Yeah I sometimes send emails like that and to be fair so does she, thinking back I may have remembered that wrong. I think the would and could were requests for other things such as corrections to information from the haulage and missing files. Which doesn't really change the principal that demands such usages.

    However the whole idea does make me wonder once again that the only reason for social conduct and worrying about what others think in a social standing context.....is because there are other people who worry about such things and because there are such a large number of people who do believe in the importance in these nonexistent standards of behaviour, to get anything done in a world filled with such people there is, unfortunately, a certain acquiescence to that standard. I do acknowledge the biological ancestry of our social conditioning, but I don't think that really has a place any more and is just that.....conditioning.

    Emotions for example are useful for certain evaluations of likes, dislikes so that we can feel motivated to make choices and pretend to have free will. But most of the time there is too much of an indulgence in it and often to no end other than pointless assumptions and unproductive actions and outbursts.

    Which is strange coming from myself as I admit openly that I am quite emotional, I dislike this aspect which is obvious from my thread and posting history.

    I suppose I am just trying to work out it's necessity. Would the world be worse off with less emotionally reactive people?

    Sorry this is going off topic a little.
    'One of (Lucas) Cranach's masterpieces, discussed by (Joseph) Koerner, is in it's self-referentiality the perfect expression of left-hemisphere emptiness and a precursor of post-modernism. There is no longer anything to point to beyond, nothing Other, so it points pointlessly to itself.' - Iain McGilChrist

    Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
    "Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
    Piglet was comforted by this.
    - A.A. Milne.

  7. #47
    Paranoid Android Video's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ESI Fi
    Posts
    3,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AffirmitiveAnxiety View Post
    I queried her about this since I didn't understand the significance straight away. She pointed out that if you ask a man if he could do something then to most men it sounds like a challenge to their competency but if you ask most women if they could do something that is a polite question asking if they would be so kind.

    In the reverse asking a woman if they would do something sounds demanding whereas to a man it sounds like a directive. Of course I don't believe it works as a general rule and my boss said she didn't really care for social norms, but it is an interesting idea and at the least it works most of the time when trying to get response to something urgent to do with invoices.
    I, for one, did feel a subtly different tonal dinging in the two different versions of the message that corresponded to your boss's protocol and was weirded out by how it had nothing to do with what I thought of the rule. What I think being that if a change in a single letter in an e-mail makes a difference in how you treat a business directive, you've emotionally brought something to work that you shouldn't have. Part of choosing to work within a system is being prepared to swallow and use the language that runs it most efficiently. When people who aren't ascend to management, that's where such political red tape comes from. Alternately, you're in the service sector, where you accommodate the public's full range of sensitivities because all you ever know about the next person to walk in is that you must persuade them to pay you.

    That said, I almost certainly make hundreds of adaptive linguistic adjustments every day without being aware. Not only is conditioning a ubiquitous thing, but I'm on the chameleonic end of humanity even within the conditioned (though not without some mixed feelings about the strategy). For record, too, my full presentation is pretty overtly "feminine".

    Emotions for example are useful for certain evaluations of likes, dislikes so that we can feel motivated to make choices and pretend to have free will. But most of the time there is too much of an indulgence in it and often to no end other than pointless assumptions and unproductive actions and outbursts.
    From what source do you draw "most"? Whose experience? I'm not ready to disagree and think you're bringing up a intriguing question, but if you don't like something about yourself, you can get negatively biased about how well that trait serves the rest of the world. I know that firsthand...

    I suppose I am just trying to work out it's necessity. Would the world be worse off with less emotionally reactive people?
    You said above this that our emotional nerves do carry some benefits. It's also known that they're more or less sensitive depending on the person and time: a spectrum. Too much and you get the problems that have already been discussed. Too low also gums up socialization in its own way. I'd put the question this way: at what levels of emotional reactivity, on either the high or the low end of it, do the cons begin to outweigh the pros in most situations? You could say that's what a lot of abnormal psych is about. If the topic doesn't fit here, a new thread would do well because of the volume of history/sources investigating what you're wondering. But if you make it, perhaps rephrase the titular question, "with less emotional reactivity".
    4w3 6w5 1w2 sx/sp ISFP

    RLOAX (don't do it)
    Melancholic Hufflepuff
    A lonely island where only what is permitted to move moves, becomes an ideal. Jung

    Kiss Kiss [johari] Bang Bang [nohari]

  8. #48
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Webslinger View Post
    I, for one, did feel a subtly different tonal dinging in the two different versions of the message that corresponded to your boss's protocol and was weirded out by how it had nothing to do with what I thought of the rule. What I think being that if a change in a single letter in an e-mail makes a difference in how you treat a business directive, you've emotionally brought something to work that you shouldn't have. Part of choosing to work within a system is being prepared to swallow and use the language that runs it most efficiently. When people who aren't ascend to management, that's where such political red tape comes from. Alternately, you're in the service sector, where you accommodate the public's full range of sensitivities because all you ever know about the next person to walk in is that you must persuade them to pay you.
    Well my first job where getting people to pay me would be the case is a retail one, but I hate working with customers since I apparently don't smile enough, so normally I'm in the back. This job I referenced is my new second job and it's more that it is a haulier company and we both have to pay and issue invoices as I am basically an office worker to an accountant.

    In truth I don't think it's really that this difference in terminology works, or that it is a truth to adhere to, when I said in my last post that it works in getting money off people, I'm not really sure why I put that since in truth it's more than just emailing in the first place is probably a good enough prompt. As for political red tape....yes I agree with you, these guidelines and rules and systems...all in the name of making money...that stupid 'bottom line' I'm really not fond of it and it is getting worse in the sectors I work in, or at least in retail.

    It's interesting you talk about a feminine presentation as I have been mistaken for female on more than a few forums in my time. I think this stems from, when I was younger, an intense dislike of the men I had to grow up around. I really did hate them, there aren't any accurate terms for it, but I had an almost innate aversion to the superficial posturing adopted by most men in the area. The stereotypical swagger, the obsession with 'manliness' and all the ridiculous assumptions and social 'rules' that went with such a mindset. So many people trying to be something, rather than just being.

    The biggest realisation to my mind was that most of these men were as irrational if not more so, than the women they often derided for being so. Like tom cats fluffing their tales, it's territorial and ridiculous, the difference is that cats actually have a purpose in what they do, humans generally don't, a cast off of behaviour from our past that has been turned into some kind of necessary social conditioning, except I don't know who is telling us that it is necessary only that most of the people I talk to about this subject offline believe it to be inherent and necessary.


    Quote Originally Posted by Webslinger View Post
    From what source do you draw "most"? Whose experience? I'm not ready to disagree and think you're bringing up a intriguing question, but if you don't like something about yourself, you can get negatively biased about how well that trait serves the rest of the world. I know that firsthand...
    I suppose my only source is me and my experiences and heuristic observations. Most of the issues in my life and from conversations, others as well, has stemmed from a momentary lapse, (Pink Floyd ), in reason based around interference from emotions that clouded my judgement in a situation. When younger I didn't recognise it at all. It was only with age that I suddenly understood and recognised the effects it can have on a person.

    A counter-argument could be made that the positive emotions do the same as the negative ones and both influence us to reaction or action in a given situation, providing the right influence or trigger. But my experiences as a youth have made me somewhat emotionally stunted, I can make people feel comfortable in a social situation and I have been able to learn that others actually are affected by what my face is telling them to the point now where I probably look quite emotive and open in my facial expressions, it's become a habit after all. Although I would say if people saw me in a social environment I was comfortable in I would look quite the loud extravert.

    But I really do have a problem expressing actual emotion and it's not because I think of it in terms of weakness, although demonstration of such certainly can weaken a persons social image if they care about such a thing. It's more I don't want anyone to either worry about me, or if angry be intimidated; as I was by anger as a child. For sure underneath I seethe with emotion and I am always surprised that others are surprised when I do have an outburst, because so many expect me to be more rational than that.

    Luckily I have little problem with disappointing their expectations. I'm not entirely sure what the link with language is here, but I do know I am more conciliatory than the men I know. This is not a source of pride or shame, it just is. However I certainly have elements to my body language that could be called feminine. What I have noticed though is I can get away with elements that some would associate with femininity without criticism that women are not able to, for example being sensitive or empathetic, the vile hypocrisy in this never stops being a glare to my attention.

    Quote Originally Posted by Webslinger View Post
    You said above this that our emotional nerves do carry some benefits. It's also known that they're more or less sensitive depending on the person and time: a spectrum. Too much and you get the problems that have already been discussed. Too low also gums up socialization in its own way. I'd put the question this way: at what levels of emotional reactivity, on either the high or the low end of it, do the cons begin to outweigh the pros in most situations? You could say that's what a lot of abnormal psych is about. If the topic doesn't fit here, a new thread would do well because of the volume of history/sources investigating what you're wondering. But if you make it, perhaps rephrase the titular question, "with less emotional reactivity".
    Maybe I should, though I am not sure on how many would be interested as I've made similar threads before. Your insight into the spectrum of emotional reactivity and tying it to the cons and pros is a better point than my own and one I'd missed. I suppose I am just jealous of those who see the world in a more logical sphere, for me it is a mess and while I can control myself, I understand as well that my emotions and the contexts that arouse them, are almost instinctive with almost no room for conscious considerations, just an immediate release of whatever biological reaction is associated with a certain emotion, which I then have to quickly pounce upon lest I do something I will most certainly regret.

    I am at my most calm and collected behind a computer screen, sad really.

    But enough whinging, back to the topic!
    'One of (Lucas) Cranach's masterpieces, discussed by (Joseph) Koerner, is in it's self-referentiality the perfect expression of left-hemisphere emptiness and a precursor of post-modernism. There is no longer anything to point to beyond, nothing Other, so it points pointlessly to itself.' - Iain McGilChrist

    Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
    "Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
    Piglet was comforted by this.
    - A.A. Milne.

  9. #49
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    What connections do you see between gender and how people use language, including both spoken and written language? I mean here the way people write and speak, not the subjects they choose to discuss. For those of you who speak languages other than English, do you see the same connections there? How much of this is really based on gender rather than on T/F differences?
    Lot of tl;dr posts in this thread. Man-posts!

    It never really occurred to me as worthy of consideration, until I started posting anonymously on forums like this one, and was met with persistent disbelief that I could be female.
    Needless to say, I have no problem employing a more combative style. I use humour quite aggressively. And I like vulgarity. Whenever I'm tempted to repudiate vulgarity because it's not "ladylike", I suppress that reaction in favour of a chortle.

    Quote Originally Posted by fia View Post
    I wasn't deferring to the other speaker as I typically do. Suddenly, what felt like out of nowhere, he started to insult me as a harpist. I was blindsided and realized that I had somehow insulted him deeply.
    Yes. I think women tend to uncritically absorb these rules about how to communicate in ways that men will not find threatening. I think it says more about their status than it does about anything innate. But it can be hard to push against such conventions if you are by nature an agreeable sort of person who does not like to give offense. Of course, the real problem here is the taking of offence being contingent on the speaker's gender.
    Quote Originally Posted by Saturned View Post
    I wonder how much of this is embedded within language itself.
    "Language is irredeemably sexist. For one thing, women can’t be virtuous. A virtue is that which is proper to a man. The Latin for man is vir, and virtus is the Latin word for manliness. Virtue is basically the same thing as virility. So if a woman were to be virtuous she would become a man-woman, which is a frightening idea. A man-woman might be so bold as to have her own opinions. She might even express them, at which point she would become a virago. To be fair, virago was originally a word for a heroic woman; but that’s still rather sexist, as it implies that heroism is a purely manly quality. " ~Mark Forsyth
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  10. #50
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    Lot of tl;dr posts in this thread. Man-posts!
    Sounds like this could become a meme of sorts.
    'One of (Lucas) Cranach's masterpieces, discussed by (Joseph) Koerner, is in it's self-referentiality the perfect expression of left-hemisphere emptiness and a precursor of post-modernism. There is no longer anything to point to beyond, nothing Other, so it points pointlessly to itself.' - Iain McGilChrist

    Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
    "Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
    Piglet was comforted by this.
    - A.A. Milne.

Similar Threads

  1. Language and the mind.
    By Athenian200 in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 04-25-2011, 09:26 PM
  2. Languages and psychology
    By Virtual ghost in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 02-12-2010, 09:48 PM
  3. [ISFP] ISFPs and Gender
    By Sunshine in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 03-04-2009, 08:20 AM
  4. Personality and Gender
    By rdonovan1 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 12-03-2008, 12:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO