X-Message-Number: 21713 Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 11:51:11 -0700 From: James Swayze <> Subject: An overlooked reason women don't join. They may not see the future we do References: <> > Message #21707 > Date: Sat, 03 May 2003 13:25:38 -0400 > From: Keith Henson <> > Subject: Re: The Scottsdale Syndorme [Paula Lemler] > > > > >From: Paula Lemler <> > >Subject: The Scottsdale Syndorme > > > >[PL] Mark Plus posed an interesting question, in his aptly named > >"Scottsdale Syndrome", regarding the ratio of men to women involved in > >cryonics. Membership at Alcor is approximately 3.5 males to every > >female. And it is true that many women are involved only because their > >significant other is. From giving tours of the facility I can tell you > >that men are more generally prone towards asking technical > >questions. Often women want to know if they can be in same dewar with > >their spouse and family members. Then there are females like myself who > >truly are passionate about cryonics. Personally, the more I learn about > >Alcor and the more people I meet who are cryonicists, the more passionate I > >become. But how do we convince more women to accept the idea? [JS] From what Paula says above it is clear women are more concerned about the touchy feely side of things in general, as we know already, but particularly where an uncertain future is in consideration. For what practical purpose does it serve to ensure that one is in the same dewar as one's spouse and family members? None whatsoever. This is especially so if we consider that death dates may be several years or even decades apart. Most of us would ascribe to the notion that there is no "knowing" one's surroundings while 'in the ice' so there is no benefit to being close to one's loved ones _while_ 'in the ice' but rather during the time before it. Perhaps we need to appeal more to the time before being 'in the ice' by fomenting a more touchy feely atmosphere or family aspect to cryonics. Paula backs this notion up by her comment that she becomes more passionate as she gets to know the people involved. I think we do not do enough 'overall' to promote a 'family of cryonicists'. Carol Shaw as a neat thing going with the Northern California Alcor outings and this needs to spread some to other regions. Geographic separateness is, of course, a problem. We as a group don't wish to travel a whole lot because of a perceived notion that it lessens our odds of survival. To some degree this is true but it is backwards since it is more dangerous to drive to work each day, in fact even more so just to the corner market since most auto accidents occur close to home, than it is to fly on an airline... to say, a National All Cryo Summit. > [KH] It is part of the basic package of human psychology that the men are more > "risk takers" than women are. Has to do with the biology of having > children. I.e., women didn't have to kill large dangerous animals to > become parents. Most of the time, men did. [JS] I believe this is but the surface of a much deeper issue. The basic differences in men and women do, I think, stem from our hunter gatherer days when women gathered and men hunted, generally speaking. There ar some theories about brain development that point to this time as the cause in the difference between men and women in the development of a larger corpus cullosum in women allowing increased communication between brain halves. This is used to explain the particularly female ability to communicate more parallel than men as any man can attest when frustrated at being interrupted by the spouse while conversing on the phone. Men can't hear two conversations at once but many women can, I am told, so the spouse thought nothing of adding in her two cents or asking about the milk while her hunter was struggling with just hearing the one conversations in the other ear. But can it go deeper than this? I think so. I have heard that women's senses are more acute than men's also. I put all this together into a purely gut-science hypothesis that perhaps all the heightened senses and increased communication between brain halves causes women to perceive the world in more magical terms than men. It is said that women are more in tune with nature. Can this be more than just a aphorism? The first ever religions were female based and probably female led. Early on the tie between the cycles of the moon and the human female reproductive cycle was noticed and deified. I don't mean to lend credence to magical notions. I am first to point out we as a species have been fooled by our brain's errant response to magnetic fields in what are called temporal lobe seizures that form ecumenical hallucinations of all sorts. These range from the angel in the room to the old hag on the chest to out of nowhere feelings of dread and evil. Only education can clear this fog from the collective human mind. Knowing we are susceptible to such hallucinations in the presence of anomalous magnetic fields will go a long way to banishing notions of ghosts, goblins angels and devils. Still it remains that women were the biggest group of callers to the now proved fraudulent "Ms. Cleo psychic hotline". Why? My gut feeling is that their gifts of heightened senses and parallel thinking fool them into believing there is more unseen to nature than seen. It must also be noted that the aforementioned hotline had as a key component a very touchy feely conversational and friendly banter familial entertainment flavor to it. I don't suggest we couch our movement in mysticism to appeal to a wider base. However, again, I do feel we could make it more familial. > [KH] I know people have been discussing how to get more women and men into > cryonics for a *long* time. It is not a well understood problem. If it is > to be understood, memetics and evolutionary psychology are the places to start. [JS] Ok now to the overlooked reason women may choose not to be involved in living in the future we cryonicist beleve will be. I was talking with a friend whom happens to be my highschool sweetheart. We got back in touch after 20 plus years apart via the internet. We've been going back and forth about religion and politics and of course my involvement in cryonics. She feels it is great for me but having a hard time seeing it for herself. Of particular note is her age now. We are both reaching our mid forties. She then is pre menopausal and looking forward to it. She's had an unpleasant time of her monthly cycles over the years and looks forward to putting them behind her. So when I asked her, "Wouldn't you love to be physically 25 again and stay that way forever?", she replies in eloquent Texas vernacular, "Hell no, I was looking forward to no more periods, thank you very much!" Well of course I tried to tell her that with the magic of nanotechnology surely in the future those sorts of issues would be made to work more properly if not even turned on and off at will or perhaps eliminated by having nanobots do the same job that is the cause for. She couldn't see it, still can't. It is not so easy, for those that have not emersed themselves in the monumental flood of information involved in learning what the techo heaven future may be like, to get their heads around the whole techno wondrus future concept. It is not so readilly forthcoming off the top of the head possible answers to yet unasked questions that we that are emersed can think up on the spot when confronted with a new what if. When you are in the future looking state of mind as I am and I am sure most of us are, you can see a new problem and extrapolate an answer based on studied principles. We see the present and the future as if already transformed. So, how can we get others to join us in having 'pre future thinking' mindsets? Until we do we cannot expect others to join us because we cannot ask for them the questions they may have. They cannot for themselves even ask these questions since they are not confronted by them while not having their minds halfway in the future as we do. James -- Cryonics Institute of Michigan Member! The Immortalist Society Member! The Society for Venturism Member! MY WEBSITE: http://www.geocities.com/~davidpascal/swayze/ Signature Memetic Virus--The worst enemy of those who now or will need medical care is the politician and proselytizing religious bigot who proscribes what doctors are allowed to prescribe and research, with the consent of their patients. Those who understand this are strongly encouraged to modify this to fit their personality, and add this to their signature file, and organize to recover our freedom from Big Brother. For those who wait until they are sick, it will be too late. Those who suffer from diseases which might have been cured by fetal tissue research or schedule 1 drugs banned by Big Brother, have the right to hold accountable those who sat on their hands or worse, deferred their responsibility for personal and humanity's survival to useless gods and pontificating religious quacks, while they remained ill and dying. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=21713