Ruth Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 VodkaFan, that was a very interesting post - I enjoyed reading it and seeing things from a man's perspective. I do think that's quite relevant to the book actually, because no matter how much she looked like a man and entered a man's world, Norah was not a man, and did not want to be one. Re the handshake. I've noticed this with men - very close male friends might give each a man hug; acquaintances won't (but then again, I wouldn't hug a woman who I wasn't close with either), but it seems to me that upon meeting one another, men always seem to shake hands, even in an informal social setting. It's a kind of ritual I guess. (And I'll be working on my own handshake, having taken your comments on board!) To be honest, I'm never sure about women shaking hands with other women. The other week for instance we had to take our dog to the vet, and after we had finished talking to her, my husband shook her hand. I wasn't sure whether to do the same, and I saw her arm twitch and realised that she wasn't sure whether to or not either. I ended up thanking her profusely for making our dog better, and she rubbed my arm! Anyway, I digress... In my experience, unlike men, women DO discuss their husbands/partners and their sex lives with their friends. I have never been comfortable with this, and will never discuss it. It's private, it's nobody else's business, and that's the way I like it I was surprised in chapter 2 at how well the other men on Ned's team took it when they found out the truth. I'm not sure how I'd feel if I'd become friends with someone and then found out that they had been effectively lying to me throughout the entire friendship. I'm not sure if their response was typical of most people's responses. No doubt there is truth in what she and you said about men's reticence. Generally I think women talk a lot more than men (not wishing to generalise though). VF, I found what you said about the men's locker room very interesting. When I was at school, I HATED getting changed in front of the other girls. I think it was because I didn't have much body confidence then. I go to a gym now, and to be honest, it no longer bothers me. I still prefer getting changed when there's no-one else there, but I don't worry if there are others there. And I can understand what your dad meant with his advice! Overall, I really enjoyed chapter 2. It did give a bit of insight into how men are together - or at least how THOSE men were together - and it made for pleasant reading. Chapter 3 made me uncomfortable, but I'm sure we'll get to that later... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankie Posted March 16, 2012 Author Share Posted March 16, 2012 Sorry that I'm behind on this, I'll try and catch up with you guys over the weekend, in the meanwhile I'm happy that you've not waited for me and have discussed the second chapter. I won't read the posts until I've finished it myself and will then comment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milo MInderbinder Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 (edited) Vodkafan and I are doing a mini group reading of Self-Made Man and we thought we'd start a thread on the book and see if others would like to join in. And even if not, here's where we are going to discuss the book. Here's what amazon has to say about the book: Self-Made Man: One Woman's Journey into Manhood and Back Again Following in the tradition of John Howard Griffin (Black Like Me) and Barbara Ehrenreich (Nickel and Dimed), Norah Vincent absorbed a cultural experience and reported back on what she observed incognito. For more than a year and a half she ventured into the world as Ned, with an ever-present five o’clock shadow, a crew cut, wire-rim glasses, and her own size 111/2 shoes—a perfect disguise that enabled her to observe the world of men as an insider. The result is a sympathetic, shrewd, and thrilling tour de force of immersion journalism that’s destined to challenge preconceptions and attract enormous attention. With her buddies on the bowling league she enjoyed the rough and rewarding embrace of male camaraderie undetectable to an outsider. A stint in a high-octane sales job taught her the gut- wrenching pressures endured by men who would do anything to succeed. She frequented sex clubs, dated women hungry for love but bitter about men, and infiltrated all-male communities as hermetically sealed as a men’s therapy group, and even a monastery. Narrated in her utterly captivating prose style and with exquisite insight, humor, empathy, nuance, and at great personal cost, Norah uses her intimate firsthand experience to explore the many remarkable mysteries of gender identity as well as who men are apart from and in relation to women. Far from becoming bitter or outraged, Vincent ended her journey astounded—and exhausted—by the rigid codes and rituals of masculinity. Having gone where no woman (who wasn’t an aspiring or actual transsexual) has gone for any significant length of time, let alone eighteen months, Norah Vincent’s surprising account is an enthralling reading experience and a revelatory piece of anecdotally based gender analysis that is sure to spark fierce and fascinating conversation. Re: "a perfect disguise that enabled her to observe the world of men as an insider." There isn't a 'world' of men. Just as their isn't a world of women. All of us are individuals. I wouldn't have the short sightedness to think that going undercover as a woman would give me any insight into what a woman mentally feels like. I think the idea for the book is pretty shallow. Whats the authors goal in writing the book? Does anybody know? It sounds like some dull feature from The One Show. Edited March 16, 2012 by Milo MInderbinder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodkafan Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Milo that's a valid question but you will have to jump in and read the book to satisfy yourself as to the answer. Personally, having read a fair bit of the book now, I think the author had an attitude of "let's see". I think it was a genuine attempt at exploring something that many people don't get to explore. I don't think the motive was money or anything material, which would have been shallow. She did immerse herself as much as she was able to . I don't agree with all her conclusions and observations, and she says herself in the intro that it can only remain a subjective experience, but I give her respect for doing it. Are you going to give the book a go? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankie Posted March 16, 2012 Author Share Posted March 16, 2012 Re: "a perfect disguise that enabled her to observe the world of men as an insider." There isn't a 'world' of men. Just as their isn't a world of women. All of us are individuals. I wouldn't have the short sightedness to think that going undercover as a woman would give me any insight into what a woman mentally feels like. I think the idea for the book is pretty shallow. Whats the authors goal in writing the book? Does anybody know? It sounds like some dull feature from The One Show. I don't believe Norah Vincent says anywhere in the book that all men are alike and therefore all observations made when watching a few specimen are true and irrefutable. Disguising oneself as a member of the opposite sex allows one to join in on the conversations some people will only have when they are in the company of people of the same sex. In all-female company I will personally feel more free to discuss things I would never talk about if I knew there were men around. Personally I think it's quite rude that you would come on here and say something like that and discard the book as something frivolous, while we are reading the book, enjoying it and discussing it's various points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milo MInderbinder Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 (edited) It was just a sceptical opinion Frankie. I apologise if I have hurt your or anybody else's feelings. I mistakenly thought that different opinions were allowed on forums, hence the name 'forum'. I am sorry for my mistake. My comment was not aimed at anybody personally. I hope you can forgive me. Edited March 16, 2012 by Milo MInderbinder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milo MInderbinder Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 (edited) Milo that's a valid question but you will have to jump in and read the book to satisfy yourself as to the answer. Personally, having read a fair bit of the book now, I think the author had an attitude of "let's see". I think it was a genuine attempt at exploring something that many people don't get to explore. I don't think the motive was money or anything material, which would have been shallow. She did immerse herself as much as she was able to . I don't agree with all her conclusions and observations, and she says herself in the intro that it can only remain a subjective experience, but I give her respect for doing it. Are you going to give the book a go? Thanks VF. Thats explains quite a bit. I may jump into the book, but I won't post about it on here as I wouldn't want to incur the wrath of Frankie. I wouldn't want to appear rude or hurt her feelings again. Edited March 16, 2012 by Milo MInderbinder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankie Posted March 16, 2012 Author Share Posted March 16, 2012 (edited) It was just a sceptical opinion Frankie. I apologise if I have hurt your or anybody else's feelings. I mistakenly thought that different opinions were allowed on forums, hence the name 'forum'. I am sorry for my mistake. My comment was not aimed at anybody personally. I hope you can forgive me. Different opinions are certainly allowed, and I do respect your view that differs from mine, I guess it was just the 'tone' of your post that rubbed me the wrong way. You did make great points in your post, ones that could even be discussed on this thread, and had you worded your thoughts in a different manner I wouldn't have gotten upset. Apology accepted, and I also apologise on my own part, I was too quick to judge. I hope this hasn't in any way affected your feelings about this forum. Thanks VF. Thats explains quite a bit. I may jump into the book, but I won't post about it on here as I wouldn't want to incur the wrath of Frankie. I wouldn't want to appear rude or hurt her feelings again. Actually I would appreciate it if you would read the book and come back and discuss it, no matter what you think of it afterwards. It is a totally different thing to disagree on things when both parties have actually read the book. I'm not as evil as I sounded on my earlier post Edit: Vodkafan can vouch for me, we completely disagreed on last month's reading circle book but it was only fun. Again, I'm very sorry if I upset you. This has not been one of the best days for me. Edited March 16, 2012 by frankie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I've finished this book now, and hmmm....I have real questions about the ethics of what she did, to be honest. Looking forward to discussing it though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodkafan Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I've finished this book now, and hmmm....I have real questions about the ethics of what she did, to be honest. Looking forward to discussing it though I am re-reading chapter 3 tonight. If you are ready and you want to bash on with the discussion Ruth please do. We have all discussed chapter 2 except Frankie but she will catch up. Funny enough although I have not read the whole book yet I have had no problems with the ethics of what she did so far. It is in the nature of a jolly jape kind of thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) Okay, I'll go ahead - there may be spoilers below I wasn't bothered by all the situations, but I thought infiltrating the monastery was very disrespectful (I say this as a person who isn't religious). I can't help thinking that if the situation was reversed - say a man had disguised himself as a woman to infiltrate a nunnery - there would have been uproar. Also, the last chapter (I'm going to spoiler this for anyone who hasn't read this far) : it was disturbing to me that she infiltrated the men's therapy group - the one place for many of these men where they could be completely and totally honest about their feelings, and where they relied on the absolute honesty of others - and basically lied to them, and it wasn't just a fib, it was a whopping great lie. If I was one of these men and found out the truth, I would have felt violated in some way (I think). Also the dating thing - it was ironic that she was doing the one thing we warn kids about every day - pretending to be someone else online, in order to secure a date. I accept that the women she dated were never in any danger at any time, but wouldn't they feel cheated, that they had invested time and energy in dating someone, only to find out that they were just the subject of someone's experiment? Despite all that, the book did make for interesting reading, and I thought it flowed well. I'm not meaning to criticise or even to suggest that I didn't enjoy it - just that I had some reservations. Anyway I digress and I apologise for that! Regarding chapter 3 - where Ned went undercover at sex clubs. Personally I found this whole chapter a bit depressing. I guess it was just the seediness of it all. I'm not sure that Ned established anything other than what I would have expected - women are objectified in such places; pretty obvious really. However, some of the men in the chapter honestly seemed pretty pathetic, and the whole part with the women giving oral sex on stage (even though it was only simulated) was uncomfortable reading. Not that I wasn't aware that such things went on, but I gues it's not something I've given much thought to in the past. Incidentally, I had no problems with Norah's disguise in this environment, where people are just seen as objects rather than people anyway. In this kind of situation, I guess she had no option but to go disguised as a man - after all, what kind of reception would she have received as a woman in such a place? Edited March 21, 2012 by Ruth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodkafan Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 That was Chapter 4 Ruth - chapter 3 was when she was dating. Seeing as you have brought it up though I agree with you, it was obvious that if she was going to that sort of place for her research she was going to meet the worst examples of both men and women. I was very uncomfortable about that chapter because although she did not spare the women from harsh criticism , the implication seemed to be that all men were walking about seeing women as sex objects all the time. That's just not true it would get in the way of our fishing and sports and playing about underneath our cars. The stupid statements of the male friend she went there with initially (not Jim) were not typical. True, men do say that stuff occasionally as we say many stupid things when beered up but in this case he was telling Norah that for maximum shock effect. I have seen that attitude before, it is a kind of petulant reverse showing off where a man will deliberately show the worst aspects of male behaviour on purpose (unrestrained burping, farting, being ignorant) Speaking personally I have never been to a strip club (my younger brother has once and he told me he did not like it). I have also never paid for any kind of sex either real or online or been tempted to. I don't know anybody who has. I agree it was a thoroughly depressing chapter. I will come back later and put my thoughts on chapter 3, which I did like much better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) That was Chapter 4 Ruth - chapter 3 was when she was dating. Seeing as you have brought it up though I agree with you, it was obvious that if she was going to that sort of place for her research she was going to meet the worst examples of both men and women. I was very uncomfortable about that chapter because although she did not spare the women from harsh criticism , the implication seemed to be that all men were walking about seeing women as sex objects all the time. That's just not true it would get in the way of our fishing and sports and playing about underneath our cars. The stupid statements of the male friend she went there with initially (not Jim) were not typical. True, men do say that stuff occasionally as we say many stupid things when beered up but in this case he was telling Norah that for maximum shock effect. I have seen that attitude before, it is a kind of petulant reverse showing off where a man will deliberately show the worst aspects of male behaviour on purpose (unrestrained burping, farting, being ignorant) Speaking personally I have never been to a strip club (my younger brother has once and he told me he did not like it). I have also never paid for any kind of sex either real or online or been tempted to. I don't know anybody who has. I agree it was a thoroughly depressing chapter. I will come back later and put my thoughts on chapter 3, which I did like much better. Interesting - in my book (Kindle version) chapter 3 was the sex club and chapter 4 was the dating. I even checked before posting today. Might be some differences in the ebook maybe? (not in the content, but in the layout?) Will be back on later to post in a bit more depth. Edited March 21, 2012 by Ruth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodkafan Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 Yes must be reversed. I think Charmer's copy is same as mine. Wonder why they did that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charmer Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 (edited) Yes ,chapter 3 is dating and 4 is the sex joint ,sorry Ruth . I did find the sex club chapter extremely vivid ,but she made all men look evil and all women sleazy. I don't think the women in this sitution are forced into doing it ,most of them enjoy what they do . I certainly don't think the men who venture into sex clubs feel ashamed of them selves ,as if they did they wouldnt go there in the first place . where are these subspecies she keep bantering on about ,she is so sexest . Edited March 21, 2012 by charmer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 No problem Charmer, the chapters are the other way around in my edition. Re the dating chapter...I was surprised that so many of the women wanted to see her when she revealed her real identity. I think I'd be annoyed to know that someone had deliberately duped me for their own experiment! Also, some of the women she dated sounded, frankly, horrible. I think I' have made my excuses and left after an hour of some of their rudeness. I would say that there probably are some men who are ashamed of themselves for going into sex clubs, but certainly not all of them. As for the women enjoying it - I can't say, but I suspect that for a lot of women it is a last desperate resort. Whether or not they enjoy it, even just reading about it made me feel dirty. What consenting adults do with each other is no business of mine, as long as they're not hurting anyone else, but the whole thing just seemed so seedy and miserable. VF made a good point - the chapter opens wtih a man making some very derogatory comnments about women. In my experience, I don't think most men think like that. Yes, they may say things like that to other men as a joke, or for shock value - but I don't think that man was representative of men in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodkafan Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 VF made a good point - the chapter opens wtih a man making some very derogatory comnments about women. In my experience, I don't think most men think like that. Yes, they may say things like that to other men as a joke, or for shock value - but I don't think that man was representative of men in general. I am relieved to hear you say that Ruth! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 I actually found myself wondering what circles Norah Vincent moved in!! She seemed very very cynical of people in general! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charmer Posted March 21, 2012 Share Posted March 21, 2012 I agree ,she treats both sexes with disrespect . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodkafan Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 OK sorry it has taken me so long to get back to the discussion. Onto the dating/love chapter, (which is 3 or 4 depending on what edition you have). I thought this was one of the better, more insightful chapters. I believe that because the author had previously dated women as a woman that gave her a much more useful perspective when it came to trying to do it as a man than if she had been a straight woman just playing at jumping the fence. What her wing man was telling her about rejection is absolutely true. We get rejected 90% of the time. I was amused that Norah was so upset by this that she only lasted ten minutes (in the bar scenario) before she had to out herself to the females she was trying to chat up. However, for us biological men there is nothing else for it but to keep trying or get used to being alone our whole lives. And don't forget that somehow or other most of us do manage to partner up with someone of the opposite sex by our mid-twenties, so it is not all doom and gloom. It is like a game really I suppose, the only game in town that matters from teenage till you are 30 .(it doesn't matter so much when you get older and have had your kids) Often you lose and sometimes you win but you have to play to get anywhere. I have never been much good at dating and I was never good looking so I got rejected a lot. But then Miracle of Miracles ! My two ex-wives both made a beeline for me so I did not have to work hard to chat them up. The only time I find rejection hurtful is when it is undeserved. For instance there have been many times when I have been talking to a woman and not trying to chat her up at all, but have been given the brush off or treated rudely. Basically the woman has had her armour up and phasers on stun. It is insulting to be dismissed and categorized when I was just trying to give her normal respect as a fellow human. Looking back this seemed to happen most when I was in the 30-42 age group and I was talking to women in their 20s. I was not what they were looking for so I didn't even warrant a modicum of respect. I can forgive it now; Biology is ruthless when you are a female with unfertilized eggs going to waste and can't find the right mate. It is always easier to talk to women of the same age and it is easier still now the pressure is off. Unlike Ruth, I was not surprised one way or the other that some of Neds dates still wanted to see her after she came out to them; I still don't understand anything about women anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Another very interesting post VF The reason I was surprised that the women still wanted to see her was not because they were turned off by the fact that she was female, but by the fact that she had lied to them. Also, I would have felt 'used' somehow - they were subjects for an experiment to her. I understand what you're saying about women being rude VF, and can only promise that not all women are like that. I've seen people (even friends of mine) be rude to men in bars, when the men were being polite and friendly. (No matter how much equality is afforded to women these days, I still think that men are generally expected to do the approaching.) I've always tried to be nice if a man has approached me - after all, it isn't easy putting yourself out there like that. Occasionally I've had a drunken idiot come up and act or speak inappropriately - and I used to do bar work when I was younger, where a lot of younger men (not wanting to generalise, but it generally was younger men) would treat barmaids as though we were thick or easy - and then I think it's fair enough to be a bit sharper, but not if a man's just trying to start a conversation. It made me laugh too when she had to out herself to the women in the bar when she wasn't getting any positive reaction from them as Ned! I also agree that as a gay woman, she was in a better position to date women as Ned rather than if she was a straight woman pretending to be a man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charmer Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 (edited) I agree with Ruth ,that not all women are rude to men unless its warranted, Breaking her cover brought a smile to my face ,as she couldnt hack it as a man being rejected ,but she was cheating to inform them that she was actually a woman . Overall I enjoyed this chapter. Edited March 26, 2012 by charmer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodkafan Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 (edited) Onto chapter 5 when she infiltrated the monastery. This is the first factual account I have ever read of life in a monastery so I had nothing to compare it to. Also never having been a monk I found nothing much to relate to so my notes here will be short. The first part of the chapter I just thought they were a bunch of idiots. They had become monks because they could not hack it outside in the real world. The fact a couple of them were gay fitted right into my preconceptions that they were in full retreat from life and were hiding out. So I left the book alone for a week and only went back to it two days ago. To learn anything I had to ditch my earlier attitude and just try to see it through Norah/Ned's eyes. I could see that this group of men were in fact trying to do something very hard in devoting their lives to God in this way. Sexuality should become irrelevant in such a level environment so I could see why Brother Jerome (and later Brother Virgil) was there. The plight of Brother Crispin who had been shunned by the others was quite interesting. Forgiveness was their creed but they could not forgive this brother in their own circle for relying on medication. The rules were in fact quite rigid. Norah said that she experienced real spiritual growth but it was also apparent to me that her guilt at the deception was staring to grow greater at this point too. I can sort of understand the need for monks and nuns in the world but it hasn't changed my opinion that it is unnatural and we were never intended to be islands without love or touch. Edited March 28, 2012 by vodkafan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 I found this chapter very interesting. However, this chapter (and the final one) were the ones I had the most problems with regarding the ethics of her experiment. Can you imagine the uproar if she had been a man dressed as a woman to get into a nunnery?!! I was surprised with how well they Monks actually took the news (I know that forgiveness is a cornerstone of their beliefs, but still). I am not religious at all, but I thought that her deception in this chapter was terrible. However, as VF said, it seemed to be at this point that Norah's double life really started to get to her emotionally. This comes up later in the book, but I won't say anything about it yet, as I don't want to give away any spoilers. Regarding the Monks themselves - I would definitely agree that for most of them, it was a kind of escape from a life on 'the outside' which they were possibly not able to hack. I don't think that applied to all of them though. And given how forgiving they were of Norah, I was disgusted at their treatment of Brother Crispin, who was taking medication to cope with his problems. At least he was facing up to the problems! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodkafan Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 And given how forgiving they were of Norah, I was disgusted at their treatment of Brother Crispin, who was taking medication to cope with his problems. At least he was facing up to the problems! But in their view he was not facing up to his problems. It is a difficult one because I am sure their rejection was causing or at least exacerbating his isolation and depression. They had basically cut him adrift. Agreed about the uproar if a man had infiltrated a convent. Never thought about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.