[Jill Domschot]

Wow, this thread has gotten very contentious since I last commented last night -- after a long tiring day in which my life revolved around everything but poetry. I didn't get a chance to read all posts, but I did catch someone use the phrase "the Jills of the world". Good, God, I hope there aren't a lot of us.
I did, however, get the chance to spend several hours attempting to revise my current post on Eratosphere and, if I'd never posted it, wouldn't have had anything to go on, so I still love this site.
I do want to add something to this argument: when I was finishing my degree several years ago, I noticed that the English dept. was dominated by women. Fiction writing classes were also dominated by women. Poetry classes were the odd exception in the gender gap; men made up at least 50% of those classes. Out of both genders, the occasional man only carried on the metric tradition (besides my sorry attempts). I wonder-- do men feel a certain attachment to the bards of old? I think of Quincy Lehr, the only modern poet I can think of who has been working on a 40 pg poem (not that I have much access to the poetry world, except through this site). Are men simply carrying on the bardic tradition?

[Jane Holland]

Originally Posted by Mark Allinson

Thank you, Jane - and welcome to Eratosphere.

I am glad to see that you support my assertion, since you acknowledge the significant and innate differences between your male and female offspring.

I am sure you don't socialize your boys to behave in this way – perhaps they are picking up the wrong role model behaviour from school or television. They must be getting this behaviour from some social source, since we know that it can't be anything innate. Nothing from Nature, surely.

No, Mark, I don't 'socialize' my twin boys to behave in that way, nor is it anything to do with 'Nature'. One boy is autistic and the other suffers from ADHD. I spend a good deal of each day trying to work round those disabilities in a calm way, which may be why I am able to deal with unpleasant hostilities and still retain that quirky sense of humour for which I am known.

I am indeed grateful for supportive comments made here - as I said above - and have not missed those who have made them. I'm sorry if I gave that impression before. I only registered in order to give some feedback on negative comments made about the new Poetic Justice forum; it's unlikely that I will make a habit of posting here, especially as my time online is limited. But it's been fun!

P.S. Michael, I already commented on the submissions versus acceptances discussion on Harriet yesterday, so would rather not repeat myself.

it's unlikely that I will make a habit of posting here

That's a shame, and Eratosphere's loss.

[Quincy Lehr]

Jill--

I think the forty-pager is more or less complete, and I don't so much know if it's a gender thing so much as a matter of my own almost perverse levels of ambition... though that may have something to do with it. While I'd say that I know plenty of very accomplished poets of both genders, for reasons of broad socializations, us lot tend to be the heaven-stormers (Rick and Nemo both have forthcoming very long poems in book form), which certain (by no means all!) of the women have moments of self-doubt that are at times a bit baffling for the likes of me, revolving (if I may perhaps blithely psychologize) around seeming presumptuous, perhaps. "Who am I to win this contest/gain this praise/etc.?" I think we of the male persuasion tend to think, "Only runner-up? What the %#^&? And come on, that review was only two paragraphs! Why wasn't it four?" A greater degree of aggro is tolerated in men as a general rule, and it takes a certain degree of presumption, indeed aggressiveness (albeit non-violent--mostly) to do the poetry thing. You have to impose yourself on other people--a lot, jump around, and wave your arms.

A poem like my forty-pager, which is heavily allusive, with long individual sections, a large cast of characters, many of them major and relatively minor historical figures, often in fictitious situations, is an act of serious audacity, and in addition to having the inclination to write a single poem at such length, one has to assume:

1. That the subject matter is compelling enough to sustain the reader's attention.

2. That the obscure bits occur in writing that is sufficiently compelling that a reader will be interested in cracking the code a bit rather than abandoning the poem out of frustration.

3. That you have the chops to merge a great deal of highly disparate material into a coherent whole.

Assumes rather a lot, doesn't it?

Quincy

P.S.--Mary Meriam's writing a two hundred-line memoir piece in ottava rima at present, so my comments should be construed as guarded ones and for what they're worth. And we took a very good eight-pager off Rose at The Raintown. So women are doing the longer stuff. And Heimat, at roughly 1,500 lines, is three times as long as the next longest "long poem" in my body of work (that being "Time Zones"--500 lines and fifteen pages in the book).

P.P.S.--Having said that, the more I think about this, the more long poems by women are occurring to me, so I'm really starting to back away from the whole notion. Well, we all have the right to talk out of our a$$es a bit every now and anon.

[Shaun J. Russell]

Originally Posted by Eva Salzman

Apart from this, I noticed (I think on another discussion) a very reasonable man insisting on how important it was that household things be shared: if he were asked he'd like to think he'd do his share, and that his wife-to-be should certainly be "allowed" time to herself! Why should she have to ask? Because it's her responsibility it goes without saying? And "allowed"?! Male writers' lives are supported and shored up to an unbelievable degree by having a support system most women can only dream about.

Gah.

I said, "I know that when I am a father, I will be more than willing to share the responsibilities of raising a family, and thereby allow my wife to have some time to herself to do whatever it is she wants to do."

That doesn't mean that I will be "allowing" her...but that circumstances will allow it. Goodness gracious...why does there seem to be this assumption that there's subtext to my words? And did you miss the part where I said it is ..."every human's inborn right to have some time to oneself"?

[Mark Allinson]

No, Mark, I don't 'socialize' my twin boys to behave in that way, nor is it anything to do with 'Nature'. One boy is autistic and the other suffers from ADHD.

Thanks for coming back, Jane. Even if only temporarily.

Unlike some folks, I believe that it is possible to have an adult discussion of sensitive issues such as these, so long as we all respect each other's positions.

I must admit that I find it strange that you should be so quick to rule out Nature in these matters (autism, ADHD) when it is clear that genetic elements have such a large part to play.

And why, for instance, do these conditions affect male children in a ratio of 3 or 4 to one over female children? ADHD has, I believe, a 75% genetic factor.

And genes are Nature.

[Jane Holland]

Sigh.

Mark, there is no previous diagnosed autism or ADHD in my family or that of my husband. Genetic factors are not always at play. Nor do many parents of similarly disabled children appreciate that kind of inference.

[Mark Allinson]

Thanks, Jane.

We will probably have to either end this discussion or move it, since it does stray from the thread topic.

Genetic factors are not always at play. Nor do many parents of similarly disabled children appreciate that kind of inference.

Yes, I agree that there is still much unknown.

But I wonder why parents would be upset with "that kind of inference".

Here are two entries from two wiki pages. The best thing about the wiki site is that these articles can be challenged.

Twin studies indicate that the disorder is highly heritable and that genetics are a factor in about 75% of ADHD cases.

Autism has a strong genetic basis, although the genetics of autism are complex and it is unclear whether ASD is explained more by multigene interactions or by rare mutations.

So I would expect many challenges to these entries from offended parents.

We could always carry such conversations on at your new site?

[John Whitworth]

Jane, so Mslexia PAY do they? Must be in receipt of an Arts Council grant then. Well, so was my old publisher, so I can't grumble. I must confess I've never actually READ Mslexia. How would they know if I submitted? I couldn't use good old Phoebe of course, but there's always Cassandra de Courcy or Josephine Bonaparte or... But perhaps my stuff just sounds male On the other hand I can do a pretty good Sophie Hannah. Has she appeared in Mslexia? And I occasionlly produce an Auden My feminine side? My gay side? My appalling old redneck side?

[Mark Allinson]

John, I wouldn't hold my breath for a response - I think all of us unreconstructed red-neck bullies have been gulaged into invisibility for most of the board.

Still, we can always chat together.

Did I tell you my daughter is doing a doctorate at your old alma mater at Oxford?

Magdalen college - she rows for them, too.