Welcome to the newsletter for the Downtown State College Rotary Club; Paul Rutter, editor rotary@paulrutter.com The Rotary WorldRegional World PublicationsNavigating the Rotary WorldThe Rotary News BasketRotary's Monthly Publication Click here to go to the home page for the Downtown State College Rotary Club

today | future | previous | announcements | speaker | birthday | etc. | assignments | district Web
HOME | past presidents | charter members & club history | annual club awards | Paul Harris Fellows

P. O. Box 10742
State College, 16805

Edition: #359
Editor: Paul Rutter
TODAY'S PROGRAM and ASSIGNMENTS for: November 29 , 2007

Program: Trina Hess - Using Humor in Everyday Living
Get involved with youth exchange!Auction: Johnston
Greeter:
Geiss
Note taker
: Eberly
Thank speaker
: Potalivo
future assignments

FUTURE PROGRAMS and EVENTS

November 22, 2007 (THANKSGIVING)
November 29, 2007 Trina Hess - Using Humor in Everyday Living
Happy Thanksgiving!December 6, 2007 Club Assembly
December 6-9, 2007 Festival of the Trees
December 11, 2007 Answer Phones WPSU-TV 8-10 PM
December 13, 2007
Holiday Auction
December 20, 2007 Wendy Donovan, Foreign Language Services, of Lockhaven
December 27, 2007
January 3, 2008 Club Assembly
February 21, 2008 Foundation Dinner in State College

- TOP -

LAST WEEK IN REVIEW

Visiting Rotarians: none
Make-ups turned in: none
Guests: Nina Chen a guest of Paul Rutter
50/50: Russ Brooks (again!) pulled the wrong card-an ace out. The pot is up to about $1050 with 25 cards remaining.
Auction: Doug Holmes provided a bottle of wine which was won by Russ Brooks with a bid of $25.

- TOP -

ANNOUNCEMENTS: (Please send announcements for the newsletter to Paul)

2008 Entertainment Book committee: Jim Eberly, Meg Moose and all of us!

PSU Football Games, Fall 2007: Whitfield x7, Rutter x7, Williams x2, Trudeau x2, Mose, plus 16 non-Rotarians? email Paul

2007-8 Hosts for Highschool International Youth Exchange: Whitfield, Potalivo

Lederer Park Clean-up, April 21: Bedell, Williams, Whitfield, Holmes, and the organizer Cathy Brown. Others? Let me know-Paul

German GSE Exchange, April 26- 30: Rutter, Williams, Pratt, Held, Brooks, Dayananda.

Spaghetti Tickets & Dinner, March March 20-21. Tickets are being sold by ALL of us.

Dictionaries for 3rd Graders: Fetter, others?

International Project with a supplying a classroom in Istanbul with Furniture: Mose, Hill, others?

2007 Entertainment Book committee: Bedell, Geise, Jones; all of us are selling them. Top Sellers are PDG Carol Walsh with 29 books. Boks sold: Walsh 30, Bedell 19, Eberly 19, Goldstein 19, Dayananda 17, Friedman 15, Christian 14, SDavis 14, Sepich 14, Jones 13, Sanders 13, Held 12, Meckstroth 11, Mose 11-All other members 10.

Happy Happy Bucks are funds paid to the club to speak up and tell all why you are happy!Bucks Paul was happy to have presented the proposal for his dissertation.Laurel was happy to have her daughter exhibit signs of show business like her family.


  • 44 people were a tthe wine tasting at Carol's home.
  • Sign up sheets are going around for the Festival of the Trees and the Fund Raising at WPSU.
  • Rotary Club of State College Downtown will be anwering phones at the WPSU Pledge Drive on Tues Dec 11 from 8pm - 10pm. To sign up email Tracy Sepich, drsepich@msn.com.
  • JA's membership application is in the ten day period. Contact Linda.
  • We need a Festival of the Trees chairman.
  • Bonnie has a leave of absence through January due to business.
  • The Dining and Entertainment book is out and has been distributed. Each member has ten books to sell. We have 41 "2 for 1" dining coupons and 16 entertainment coupons.
  • The club Foundation Dinner is February 21.
  • Doug Holmes said that the recruiting for the next year of youth exchanges is coming up.
  • Roger reports the dictionary project went fast!
  • We are still collecting cereal box tops.
  • Congratulations to Tineke Cunning and Marce Pancio of the Sunrise Rotary Club for being selected as teams leaders for the Spring 2009 GSE to the Philippines and the Summer 2009 GSE to Puerto Rico respectively. The Philippines trip is a general GSE and the one to Puerto Rico is a Spanish Language teachers GSE.
  • We collected $53.50 for the Rose Bowl float.
  • A Paul Harris Fellowship was presented to Carl Hill's son Wesley who was in from San Diego.
  • There is a new Rotary credit card available
  • Carl Hill received Distinguished Service Award for Youth Exchange work
  • Jennifer Tress came to say thanks on behalf of Special Olympics and provided the club with an update about that organization's doings.
  • Carl Hill received Distinguished Service Award for Youth Exchange work
  • Extra club money is being used this year for a second vocational scholarship of $1500.
  • Drinking wine spodie odie, drinking wine Bop Bop!Point your web browser to: http://www.rotilink.org/eClubs/ click on a club's Website and follow the directions to do make-ups with the e-club. At the end, you print out your make up slip and submit it to current secretary Rainer Domalski.
  • 44 people were at the wine tasting event at Carol's.
  • At the Purdue game, we had a turnout of 11, including four Rotarians (Mark Whitfield, his son Nate and Nate's girlfriend; also Paul Rutter; Tineke Cunning from the breakfast club and her husband and Rotarian Jack from the Tyrone Rotary) for the football game as a fundraiser. Rotarians helping over the season included George Trudeau, Paul Rutter, Mark Whitfield, Bob Williams, Hugh Mose, Tammy Miller and Tineke Cunning from Sunrise Rotary, and Bill Bell and Jack Cunning from Tyrone.) Thanks for all your help! We raised over a thousand dollars and had fun!

  • Previous Week's Speaker: Dich Held on the Foundation

    Dick Held spoke to the club about the Rotary Foundation.

     

    Note Taker: Dr. D.

    - TOP -

    Rotary Birthdays this month:

    Martella, Nov 5th; Turley, Nov 26th; Geise, Nov 30th;
    (if I missed yours please email me and let the club secretary know too)

    Etc.

     M  A  K  E  -  U  P  S

    Reminders on makeup's:
    All makeup's are good for credit toward meetings missed 14 days before or 14 days after the makeup. Makeup's made at other Rotary Club meetings also get a dues credit. Makeup's at service projects get attendance credit only. All makeup cards should be turned into the club secretary promptly. To find out where you can makeup, check the RI Club Directory, or District Web site.

    NEIGHBORING CLUBS- check out the web site listing or one of the E-clubs all over the world
    MEMBERS- check out the web site listing
    COMMITTEE CHAIRS- check out the web site listing

    - TOP -

    DATE
    AUCTION
    GREETER
    MEETING NOTES
    THANK SPEAKER
    November 22
    No Meeting
    Happy
    Thanksgiving!!
    November 29
    Johnston
    Geise
    Eberly
    Potalivo
    December 6
    Jones
    Goldstein
    Fetter
    Assembly


    today | future | previous | announcements | speaker | birthday | etc. | assignments

    “If we only listen to those whom we already see eye to eye, we will never create better understanding, a concept that is at the core of Rotary.”
    -Martin G Molony, District 1160 Governor, Dublin Central, Ireland
    in The Rotarian, January 2006

    "Of the things we think, say or do:

    Is it the TRUTH?

    Is it FAIR to all concerned?

    Will it build GOODWILL and BETTER FRIENDSHIPS?

    Will it be BENEFICIAL to all concerned?"

     


    district 7350; club 24095
    State College Downtown Rotary; P.O. Box 10742; State College, PA 16805- 0742
    Paul Rutter-Club Webmaster & Freelance Web Design 814-867-5001

    Contact club webmaster & newsletter editor: Paul Rutter

    READ ON.........

    Why men and women argue differently
    Women want to talk about it, but men are more likely to retreat into stoney silence. Men and women argue about everything from adultery to Zionism, but do so differently: submissive, passive, aggressive, abusive. Maybe...

    October 30,2007
    Damian Whitworth in The Times of London

    In Gapun, a remote village on the Sepik River in Papua New Guinea, the women take a robust approach to arguing. In her pithy new book The Myth of Mars and Venus, Deborah Cameron reports an anthropologist’s account of a dispute between a husband and wife that ensued after the woman fell through a hole in the rotten floor of their home and she blamed him for shoddy workmanship. He hit her with a piece of sugar cane, an unwise move that led her to threaten to slice him up with a machete and burn the home to the ground.

    At this point he deemed it prudent to leave and she launched into a kros – a traditional angry tirade directed at a husband with the intention of it being heard by everyone in the village. The fury can last for up to 45 minutes, during which time the husband is expected to keep quiet. This particular kros went along these lines: “You’re a f****** rubbish man. You hear? Your f****** prick is full of maggots. Stone balls! F****** black prick! F****** grandfather prick! You have built me a good house that I just fall down in, you get up and hit me on the arm with a piece of sugar cane! You f****** mother’s ****!”

    Such a domestic scene may be familiar to some readers, but for most of us arguing with our partners is not quite such an explosive business; except, perhaps, when discussing who is most responsible for a navigational hiccup on the way to lunch at the home of an old flame of our partner’s, or getting to the bottom of who left the ****** ******* cap off the **** ******* toothpaste for the third ****** ******* time this ****** ******* week.

    Human beings argue about everything from adultery to Zionism and we do so in different styles, whether we are submissive, passive, aggressive, abusive, abusive-passive, aggressive-abusive, submissive-aggressive or submissive-passive-aggressive-abusive.

    But are there any broad differences between the sexes in the way that we argue? US research into marital stress on the heart has thrown up an intriguing finding about the way some are prone to “self-silencing” during arguments. The research by Elaine D. Eaker, published in Psychosomatic Medicine, found that more men than women had a tendency to bottle up their feelings during confrontations with their partners.

    Tim Smith is a psychology professor at the University of Utah, whose own research has found indications that women’s heart health is affected adversely by quarrels and men’s when they feel they are losing control. There are clear indications, he says, that it is a male tactic to withdraw from arguments. “Women, on average, are more often in the role of the managers of relationship matters. They are often in the position of bringing up and pursuing things they would like to change. This is seen in wives making a request and pursuing it and husbands withdrawing and pulling back. The more of it a couple displays the weaker their relationship future is.”

    John Gray, whose Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus is one of the most successful self-help books of all time, explains this male withdrawal process thus: “To avoid confrontation Martians may retire into their caves and never come out. This is like a cold war. They refuse to talk and nothing gets resolved.” He says that it is “passive aggressive behaviour” and Martians are “afraid of confrontation and would rather lie low and avoid talking about any topics that may cause an argument”.

    Edward, 37, a freelance writer, says he is a practitioner of the withdrawal method. “I’m useless at arguing. I have things that bother me but when I finally say something I am too slow to win the argument. I’ll make an accusation about what I know is a pattern of behaviour that is hurtful for me. But then I’ll get asked to come up with examples and I’ll freeze. I don’t recall them. I can only launch in when I have all the evidence to back up my argument ready to use. I suppose I’m too lazy to do that. I think women, on the whole, are more practised at arguing, or more interested.”

    Gray’s thesis is that the differences and disagreements between men and women don’t hurt so much as the ways in which we communicate them. “Most couples start out arguing about one thing and within five minutes are arguing about the way they are arguing.” The pattern he identifies involves a woman raising an issue, often asking rhetorical questions rather than being direct. The man, rightly or wrongly, hears disapproval. Men, according to Gray, are in great need of approval.

    Feeling challenged, the man becomes focused on being right and forgets to be loving. The woman then becomes upset by his unloving delivery and defends herself from his sharpened expressions. Her tone becomes mistrusting and rejecting. Gray says that we need to remember that our partner objects not to what we are saying but how we are saying it.

    “Most arguments escalate when a man begins to invalidate a woman’s feelings and she responds to him disapprovingly.” When a woman shares her frustration men go on the defensive. “Every cell in a man’s body reacts with a list of explanations and justifications designed to explain away her upset feelings.”

    Christine Northam, a counsellor with Relate, the marriage-counselling service, points to An Introduction to Family Therapy, by R. Dallos and R. Draper, which cautions that “despite these differences between men and women, especially in the supposed concern that women have with feelings, analysis of everyday conversations does little to bear this out.”

    But Northam adds that in her experience of many years of helping couples, the way men and women have been conditioned affects the way that they argue and that it true that men have a greater tendency to withdraw. One popular phrase among psychologists is “the distancer and the pursuer”, says Northam. “One of you wants to sort it and the other one backs off: ‘I will shut down and I won’t deal with you.’ That does lead to a lot of tension in the relationship and you end up not addressing what you need to be talking about.

    “I do talk with men who find it very, very difficult to engage with their feelings. Women say: ‘He won’t respond to me, he won’t listen, he thinks he’s right all the time.’ Men have been socialised to think that they know what they are talking about. I know it’s changing, it’s really changing a lot. But that’s still around: ‘Men are powerful and what I say goes.’ Women internalise that too. It’s not just the blokes. Women get very frustrated, hysterical, when trying to get their point across because it seems that it just falls on the dead ground all the time. What they are saying is not being picked up and acknowledged and dealt with.

    “Certainly the younger men that I see tend to be much more willing to engage with their feelings, keen to understand them and talk about them. Older men find it slightly trickier or more than slightly trickier.”

    She adds that women are also capable of the withdrawal technique. “Oh yes, women are quite powerful at doing that as well. They change the subject or rubbish it or cry. Crying is a good one and then the poor man says: ‘Oh my god, she’s in tears’.”

    We all recognise that scenario. “I don’t argue a lot but I do cry a lot,” says Sarah, 32, an advertising executive. “I’ll say something harsh to him and he’ll say something probably only equally harsh back and then I’ll be in floods of tears. I call my friend and she says: ‘Where are you?’ ‘In the loo.’ And then when I finally come out after half an hour he’s just watching TV as if nothing has happened.”

    Christine Northam says that another major difference between the way men and women argue is that “men tend to resort to aggression very quickly, whereas women are more manipulative and try and present a problem and go on and on about it rather than being succinct. Men get angry and feel defensive and shameful very quickly, then they get aggressive. In the worst-case scenario they get violent. Men tend to probably become more aggressive more quickly overall — but not every time by any means.

    “Aggression I would say is more easy to recognise when blokes are arguing. Men want to be more powerful. All couple disagreements are about power and control: who’s going to come out on the top. You have to be ever so grown up to start negotiating and that’s what couple counselling is about — helping to negotiate instead of arguing all the time.”

    She says that men are also more prone to decline to take their partner’s concerns seriously. “They say: ‘She’s going on again. Oh, here we go.’ They tend to trivialise. I’m afraid it goes back to our patterning; the stereotypical stuff we have all been fed. We are very much influenced by the way our parents were or even our grandparents. We all like to think we are terribly different but we are not. It stays inside you and so the way you do emotions is learnt in your family. To look at them, understand them and then make a conscious decision that you will do it differently is very grown up.”

    Deborah Cameron, the Rupert Murdoch Professor of Language and Communication at the University of Oxford, believes that the differences between the way men and women argue are overstated. “The idea that men and women differ fundamentally in the way they use language to communicate is a myth,” she says. She is sceptical of research that examines what people say in staged situations, or that relies on people to report on their own relationships. “I do not believe research based on questions about how people argue that require them to be better observers than almost all people are of their own linguistic behaviour.”

    Even if people were to be wired up and recorded over a long time to capture spontaneous arguments, it is hard to draw conclusions about differences between the sexes, she says, because people argue differently in different cultures and situations, as her account of the approach of the women of New Guinea suggests. “It depends which men and women you observe,” she says. The idea that there is no difference between the arguing styles of a woman in the West, her granny and a woman in a tribal village in Africa is “absolute rubbish”.

    “You can’t generalise about men and women. Cultural differences are much bigger than gender differences. You need to specify what culture and what community within that culture.” She is scathing of John Gray’s work, which she says “ignores the difference that context and subject matter make, and is massively generalised and exaggerated”.

    She says that “it is intriguing to people that there are differences, but people use it as a prop”. But while Cameron is probably right that it is extremely hard to prove in a scientific way that there are differences between men and women in the way that they argue, it is also unlikely that anyone will ever be able to show conclusively that there are no differences. So as long as men and women are still arguing, researchers and writers and psychobabblers will continue to argue about how they are arguing.

    And on that note I am going to withdraw from this particular discussion.


    Do you have anything to share? Email me (Paul) and chances are it will find its way here.

    Youth Exchange