I am one of the many people — sensible people, many of them women! — who naturally withdraw from the political debate. It's just not worth it. Life is short, and much of it is beautiful and full of love. I want to go somewhere else. But somewhere else for me has been writing — ironically, about politics. That's an odd thing about me, but it puts me in a position where I can see some things that typical political junkies don't see.
A woman’s sensitivity to stress is heightened by reading bad news stories.
The same study also reportedly found that men are not affected the same way by similar press coverage.
You never see politicians appeal specifically to men, or journalists write pieces,...pointing out that the "men's vote" could decide the election. (The closest you get to the latter is analyses of male subsets like "white working-class men.")
The reason for this disparity is that there is a constellation of what are called "women's issues" because their effects on women are different from those on men: matters involving sexual behavior, reproduction, marriage (other than the newfangled same-sex kind), childrearing, and sex disparities in education, the workplace and elsewhere. By contrast, there are no "men's issues." Issues that aren't "women's issues" affect both sexes more or less equally.
Which isn't to say there are no issues whose effects on men are different from those on women. It's just that any distinctly male perspective tends to get downplayed because of the convention of calling them "women's issues."
Post a Comment
COMMENTS ARE BACK ON