theory and practice

in discussing whether some fields are masculine and some are feminine i think a lot about whether theory is more on the feminine side versus practice being more on the mascuiline side. i am pondering whether thinking about animation theory and architecture theory is something more feminine, you just stand in one corner and bullshit about what others really do with their elbow grease, by getting in there and getting their hands dirty and doing it. i myself am @ this time writing about animation and architecture, i just developed a prototype of a magazine called "on animation and architecture". so how does this tie in with the discussion of whether some fields are more feminine, whether some are more masculine. in the class, it was conceded that landscape architecture is more feminine and the architecture of buiding, the part that has to do with concrete, metal and the prospect of erecting steelstructures is more masculine. debatable as this may be there is still an undeniable ring of truth to this position, further cemented by the fact that there are more male architects than female architects and more female landscape architects than male architects ( i think, then again i might be wrong). anyways, i think there are more female architectural theorists and i kind of think that this is a field that attracts more females. so this is where the discussion of my mgazine comes in. i will elaborate on this in my presentation on tuesday trying to clarify what i mean.