Many associate sensitivity with women, but without stopping to consider what it means.
It's as if there can be only one form of sensitivity. But logic and experience will tell you there are many.
An article recently pointed out that one's capacity to nurture can be directly related to a decreased sensitivity to danger, facilitated by estrogen receptors.
Stop and think about this for a few minutes.
The feminine hormone is associated with a decrease in sensitivity in women who have working estrogen receptors. The feminine hormone is associated with a decrease in sensitivity in women who have working estrogen receptors. Those "normal" women are less sensitive to stress than those women who do not have working estrogen receptors.
Now, if we are American, we will be inclined to lament what appears on the surface to be an imperfect working of the biology of those who cannot accept traditional gender roles. It's as if biology had to be forced into metaphysical constraints, to reproduce only what is already familiar and has been socially defined as normal.
But on the other hand, there is an adaptive sensitivity to stress, which appears in the absence of estrogen receptors.
I have that increased environmental sensitivity and let me tell you, this is quite the life to have. I wouldn't change it, not for anything.
Whereas I'm often blunt and almost incapable of recognizing many social mores, I can anticipate a punch even before it has hit me.
I can move from a normal state of high alert to combat mode in the blink of an eye.
To put it a different way: I read environmental cues exceedingly well. Should there be a crisis, I'm the one you want working for you. I'm able to filter out all the extraneous social information and simply work on handling the crisis. I'm capable of extreme tunnel vision.
If I am highly adapted to a stressful environment I should add: I am adapted only to a stressful environment. There's nothing about me that is particularly nurturing and I'm not that social.
I do enjoy my heightened sensitivity to danger, because just by being awake I take in many levels of sensory information. I'm sure that, not just my grandmother's stress levels, but my basic character and an upbringing in a war environment has much to do with the fact that I'm constantly inclined to sniff the wind, to see what's on it. This seems to me like the epitome of pleasure, to be aware and responsive to my environment.
That's why a simple experience like a bus trip across Zimbabwe can be so eventful for me. The more dangerous it is, the better. If there are pot holes and an element of the unknown, my sense of stress increases, which makes me take in more information -- which is immeasurably pleasureful.
I embrace challenges that require a honing of environmental receptivity. Skydiving greatly appeals because you have to ascertain the exact direction and intensity of the winds to make a safe and effective landing. Otherwise, you smash into the ground and break your limbs.
So this is my genetic inheritance -- and why "women's work" not only does not appeal to me, but is incomprehensible, except from the position of an observer.
I'm far too sensitive -- and not sensitive enough -- to be able to get involved with those kinds of activities.
It's as if there can be only one form of sensitivity. But logic and experience will tell you there are many.
An article recently pointed out that one's capacity to nurture can be directly related to a decreased sensitivity to danger, facilitated by estrogen receptors.
Stop and think about this for a few minutes.
The feminine hormone is associated with a decrease in sensitivity in women who have working estrogen receptors. The feminine hormone is associated with a decrease in sensitivity in women who have working estrogen receptors. Those "normal" women are less sensitive to stress than those women who do not have working estrogen receptors.
Now, if we are American, we will be inclined to lament what appears on the surface to be an imperfect working of the biology of those who cannot accept traditional gender roles. It's as if biology had to be forced into metaphysical constraints, to reproduce only what is already familiar and has been socially defined as normal.
But on the other hand, there is an adaptive sensitivity to stress, which appears in the absence of estrogen receptors.
I have that increased environmental sensitivity and let me tell you, this is quite the life to have. I wouldn't change it, not for anything.
Whereas I'm often blunt and almost incapable of recognizing many social mores, I can anticipate a punch even before it has hit me.
I can move from a normal state of high alert to combat mode in the blink of an eye.
To put it a different way: I read environmental cues exceedingly well. Should there be a crisis, I'm the one you want working for you. I'm able to filter out all the extraneous social information and simply work on handling the crisis. I'm capable of extreme tunnel vision.
If I am highly adapted to a stressful environment I should add: I am adapted only to a stressful environment. There's nothing about me that is particularly nurturing and I'm not that social.
I do enjoy my heightened sensitivity to danger, because just by being awake I take in many levels of sensory information. I'm sure that, not just my grandmother's stress levels, but my basic character and an upbringing in a war environment has much to do with the fact that I'm constantly inclined to sniff the wind, to see what's on it. This seems to me like the epitome of pleasure, to be aware and responsive to my environment.
That's why a simple experience like a bus trip across Zimbabwe can be so eventful for me. The more dangerous it is, the better. If there are pot holes and an element of the unknown, my sense of stress increases, which makes me take in more information -- which is immeasurably pleasureful.
I embrace challenges that require a honing of environmental receptivity. Skydiving greatly appeals because you have to ascertain the exact direction and intensity of the winds to make a safe and effective landing. Otherwise, you smash into the ground and break your limbs.
So this is my genetic inheritance -- and why "women's work" not only does not appeal to me, but is incomprehensible, except from the position of an observer.
I'm far too sensitive -- and not sensitive enough -- to be able to get involved with those kinds of activities.
No comments:
Post a Comment