That essay ought to start a very interesting discussion !
Just my 2 cents here
I agree with what you say about the alpha males (both genuine and self-styled). Some of them can be extremely frustrating to work with, but I not only manage the jerks pretty well, I've also found genuine friendships with a few. I'm also much like you, Christine. I'm a radical outsider by nature, but trim my sails as needed. It's a matter of strategic balance and an ability to form constructive alliances, and sometimes it's not easy. Many times I have failed.
I do strongly agree with you that working together is the right goal, and the alphas often don't wish to meet others at eye level, in just the way you describe. The radical outsiders often do have the ability to see further outside the box, and also have the ability to reach a wider range of people than the alphas can alone. But the alphas do know "how things work" - not only in this present dysfunctional system, but in a general way as well. And they have the capital, the status of their credentials and resumes, and the ability to network and persuade others like them, or maneuver around them if need be. There are some who are worth forming alliances with, and some who are not. The same can be said of the radical outsiders. Not all radicals have good ideas, some of them are nasty people, and it's rare to find one who works well in practical leadership situations.
There are good people worth working with, and bad people not worth our time. It's on each of us, individually, to recognize the individual in others.
I don't personally like the terms "left brain/right brain" as I believe the mind is not just a substance produced by the brain. Instead, I prefer "analytic mind/intuitive mind." Whatever words we call them, the two minds work best together, both in our own personal selves, and in our interactions with others. If we can teach the alphas just one thing, it would be that.
Thank you for expanding on my essay. We cannot say everything in a single essay, and while I was writing this I was thinking that we have made little or no progress since the feminist hey-day of the 70s. We have been intimidated out of using whatever language we have devised in each subsequent generation, but the issues are still the same. Your terms "analytic mind/intuitive mind." are good. I resist these as well as an "either/or", as I function well in both, but I am chronically aware that our current "leadership" on Substack (and thank goodness we do have some form of coming together) are terminally locked into analytic mind and do not even acknowledge intuitive mind. We need them to loosen their mind-lock on the conversation to allow air space for the intuitive.
That essay ought to start a very interesting discussion !
Just my 2 cents here
I agree with what you say about the alpha males (both genuine and self-styled). Some of them can be extremely frustrating to work with, but I not only manage the jerks pretty well, I've also found genuine friendships with a few. I'm also much like you, Christine. I'm a radical outsider by nature, but trim my sails as needed. It's a matter of strategic balance and an ability to form constructive alliances, and sometimes it's not easy. Many times I have failed.
I do strongly agree with you that working together is the right goal, and the alphas often don't wish to meet others at eye level, in just the way you describe. The radical outsiders often do have the ability to see further outside the box, and also have the ability to reach a wider range of people than the alphas can alone. But the alphas do know "how things work" - not only in this present dysfunctional system, but in a general way as well. And they have the capital, the status of their credentials and resumes, and the ability to network and persuade others like them, or maneuver around them if need be. There are some who are worth forming alliances with, and some who are not. The same can be said of the radical outsiders. Not all radicals have good ideas, some of them are nasty people, and it's rare to find one who works well in practical leadership situations.
There are good people worth working with, and bad people not worth our time. It's on each of us, individually, to recognize the individual in others.
I don't personally like the terms "left brain/right brain" as I believe the mind is not just a substance produced by the brain. Instead, I prefer "analytic mind/intuitive mind." Whatever words we call them, the two minds work best together, both in our own personal selves, and in our interactions with others. If we can teach the alphas just one thing, it would be that.
Thank you for expanding on my essay. We cannot say everything in a single essay, and while I was writing this I was thinking that we have made little or no progress since the feminist hey-day of the 70s. We have been intimidated out of using whatever language we have devised in each subsequent generation, but the issues are still the same. Your terms "analytic mind/intuitive mind." are good. I resist these as well as an "either/or", as I function well in both, but I am chronically aware that our current "leadership" on Substack (and thank goodness we do have some form of coming together) are terminally locked into analytic mind and do not even acknowledge intuitive mind. We need them to loosen their mind-lock on the conversation to allow air space for the intuitive.
Bret Weinstein gave us Kirsch and Malone. That puts him on my shit list.
I am wary of pointing fingers. The person on Substack who makes my flesh creep, Mr Teflon, is loved by everyone world wide. What does that mean?
https://christinekent.substack.com/p/thought-leaders-infighting-and-character
Wow! Just wow!!
I don't know if this is a compliment or a rebuttal?
Groan.