Random Thought #68

I was just thinking how girls and boys develop differently at a long age and just set off a barrage of thoughts. I think its fairly well established that girls develop faster than boys at a younger age. They mature faster, learn more earlier, and are in general more developed. Boys of course catch up and in some cases surpass their female counterparts at a later age. (Keep in mind I'm talking in general terms) I found a lot of similarities to this pattern in various philosophies. Its the concept of slow and steady versus wait and sprint; little picture vs big picture; yin/yang; complimentary forces; even career paths and natural roles. Let's use the tortoise and the hare to illustrate the first scenario. (a little backwards though) Let's pretend that the hare rests before sprinting ahead. In that case, the female is the tortoise. Slow and steady and consistent so they take the lead in development while the hare (male) rests and takes it easy. The hare then sprints ahead using all of his energy to make up the lost ground (huge sprint) and surpasses the tortoise and realizing he is so much further ahead, takes another rest. In the meantime, the tortoise passes the hare again and the hare has to sprint using all his energy to get ahead again. Females typically are even-keeled, consistent, strong and steady. Males are impulsive and lazy so they wax and wane. Which do you think is more suitable to raising children? That's where roles come into play. This plays out in ancient communities too. You have the nomads you roam and conquer and never settle down (male) and then you have the agrarian agriculturists (female) who are conquered and provide the sustenance to the conquering parties. The two cannot live without each other. They are complimentary to each other. The agriculturists provide the sustenance and structure while the conquerers provide the leadership and drive. That brings me to another point. This society is always comparing to determine a winner in the short-term. Instead they should be collaborating for the betterment of all in the long-term. Since we're dealing with males/females, let's do a simple comparison to see why 1+1=3 is plausible. Let's compare amount of hormones. We know that females have a small amount of testosterone and males have a small amount of estrogen in them, but obviously each has a dominant hormone. So, let's say that males have 1.8 of testosterone and 1.2 of estrogen and females have 1.8 of estrogen and 1.2 of testosterone. If comparing them directly to see who is the winner of testosterone, the male obviously wins, but if we compare to see who has more estrogen, the female clearly wins, but if we measure them together (collaborate), we find that they together have a hormone level of 3 no matter which one you measure. All are equal and greater than if we simply compare instead of collaborate. Ok, so maybe my math is all weird but it made sense to me in my head and I think you get the concept of collaborate instead of compete or compare. This illustrates the yin/yang principle and why opposites are necessary and complimentary. This explains the family as the natural unit of the eternities. What's funny is that all of these examples are philosophical principles that we are familiar with....which leads to my next thought