Gender - what is it practically

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

As mentioned in other threads, i have problems with gender. But my problems lie less with trans people, genderqueer and so on, who are usually the topics of the other threads, my problems are with the two big ones, male and female.

We all know the definitions of genders which seperates them from sexes ( where all the biologigal stuff gets in ) and how it includes vague referrences to culture, social norms, identities, roles etc.
But this definition doesn't really explain what gender actually is in practice. Because it leaves the important part (which roles, which cultural customs etc.) out.

That is what i want to ask here. And to avoid getting sidetracked with fighting about gender essentialism, let's just focus on gender alone and ignore sexes.

What is (in your opinion or culture) male ?

What is (in your opinion or culture) female ?

Are there things you grew up with/learned to consider male/female that you think are not coded in such a way today ?

I hope we can have an interesting exhange of opinions/experiences and i also hope we can avoid yet another stupid argument about US based left-/right politics.

As some are aware, I come from a maternal culture, where women traditionally were the ones who owned property, conduct business and are responsible for the economy and the man takes the woman's family name upon marriage. What was considered "of the mother' or "of the father" in our culture is:
The mother was the life bringer, the nurturer, compassionate, empathetic, welcoming, creative, graceful and handles difficulty with ease, puts others needs before her own, and a word that I am not sure exists in English but means "flirtatious in a feminine way" or maybe " eyelash batting", "feminine wiles" would be the best way to describe it.
( There were more but I am sleepy atm so I am sure I am leaving out plenty)

Of the father is he was the protector, confident without being arrogant, strong, prideful, cautious, instilling honor.
( again much more to it than that, i may add later when it is not 5am)

It is important to note though, that it was believed all people have all traits within them, not just males or females, they just have different amounts. In addition, we were taught there are multiple genders, not just male and female but others, at least 4 but could be more. Those that were not primarily male or female were considered "two spirits" and were considered gifted to be able to understand more about males/females than those who were primarily male or primarily female. This was considered a great gift to society and a skill that could be used to help others.

Physically, the female brain and the male brain are actually different:

Maps of neural circuitry show women's brains are suited to social skills and memory, men's perception and co-ordination

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/02/men-women-brains-wired-differently

Male brains utilize more gray matter, process neurochemicals to a different degree and have structural difference than female brains. Female Brains utilize more white matter and have a larger hippocampus
This results in females being multitaskers,communicators and better deal with stress and sitting still different than males and males being more focused on a single task, less focused on sensitivity to other's feelings and may be more impulsive or aggressive.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hope-relationships/201402/brain-differences-between-genders

This is also interesting in that transgender brain scans also reveal that their brains are more closely related to the gender they identify with:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/05/180524112351.htm
https://globalnews.ca/news/4223342/transgender-brain-scan-research/

EDIT:
In addition, in regards to things that were considered " male or female" when I was growing up, that did not really exist much in my native culture, but when we moved it was like night and day. I had a rude awakening , and really could not believe the sheer amount of pressure put on girls to only like/do girl stuff and boys to do boy stuff.

Being a " girly girl" who enjoys video games, action figures, lego, building forts in the woods and making traps was rough. I wore dresses, boys always tried to chase me hold me down and kiss me, yet they were also my best friends who liked the same stuff I did. Most girls were interested in nothing I was interested in. When I had slumber parties and invited girls over, I literally hid all my toys and brought out stuff I never played with or my sisters stuff because I didn't want them to think me weird. Even at recess the girls did girl things and the boys did boy things like it was somehow bad to like to do both.

These days I think they have made it easier for girls to like/do more "boy stuff" than it was when I was a kid, but I still think it can be rough on boys who will still be made fun of by other boys for doing or liking girl stuff due to how girls are "perceived as weak" . They still call them " girly names" as a means to demean them so being like a girl is still a dirty word to boys. I would very much like to see that change. Boys should be able to have easy bake ovens and dollhouses as much as girls should be able to play lego and video games and it all be great that they can enjoy the things they do.

Satinavian:

What is (in your opinion or culture) male ?

What is (in your opinion or culture) female ?

Hah! Good question.

I think at best I might view it in quite fuzzy terms, i.e. tendencies to attitudes and behaviours rather than clear distinctions, and that those aspects are fluid with place and time.

In my youth, I once asked a (female to male) transexual just prior to transition how he thought he was male - what experiences of maleness did he have to think that was right for him. I was asked in return how I could tell I was male. As an answer I found that a little unsatisfactory, and yet also that it did make a good point: how do I know what to be male is except that I believe I am male, knowing my experience of maleness differs to other men?

And honestly, I've never really taken the matter significantly further and deeper than that, so I've little wisdom to add.

So like, are you looking for an objective definition of "masculine" or "feminine" behavior? Because what falls into either category can vary wildly by culture.

Whether or not gender is an innate trait or just a new way some people have started to interpret human variability in behavior or self-identification is still inconclusive, from personal experience, some people have a gender that they actively identify with, other people don't have a gender and just are what they are and do what they do.

At the end of the day, it hardly matters, people should feel free to express themselves as long as it does not harm others or transgresses their rights, gender in and of itself has no practical application, therefor, it is practically irrelevant.
Socially speaking though, it is quite relevant, but I feel a general "live and let live" is the best approach.

BreakfastMan:
So like, are you looking for an objective definition of "masculine" or "feminine" behavior? Because what falls into either category can vary wildly by culture.

No, i am looking for a couple of subjective opinions to see if there is some overlap or not and maybe if the answers do vary depending on where my fellow escapists are from or if individual differences let regional/cultural ones vanish. And also to see if we are actually remotely talking about the same thing when we say masculine or feminine.

So far i got exactly one answer and some other person admitting he doesn't really know, which is overall kinda disappointing.

Satinavian:
my problems are with the two big ones, male and female.

Not "the two big ones". The two "only ones".

Satinavian:
We all know the definitions of genders which seperates them from sexes ( where all the biologigal stuff gets in ) .... let's just focus on gender alone and ignore sexes.

This is extremely disingenuous. No we don't all "know the definitions of genders" or accept that they are separate from the sexes. Knowing the definition or not, you cannot handwave something to be so obviously factual that everyone readily accepts it. The only truth is that the vast majority of the world would not agree that they are separate or that there are more than two genders. I believe there are two sexes, dictated by biology. Excepting for the minuscule fraction of actual intersex people in the world, strangely the ones who are never actually discussed or given any say in the discussion, it is known in science and consistent across the known world in every culture, race and socioeconomic background that there are physical and other differences between the sexes and that the things which are male and female are obvious to anyone with eyes.

It is dishonest to divorce them, it is further dishonest to suggest that everyone readily accepts it. Canada, New York and Facebook might recognise 30 or 60 or however many made-up genders they want, but that doesn't make it less ridiculous to non far-left people who don't buy any of it. I will accept that people may not be happy in their skin, I will accept that people may believe they are anything they want and I will defend their right to believe it. But I will not accept other people insisting that I need to accept that they are the thing they claim to be when I can see that it isn't true.

Satinavian:
What is (in your opinion or culture) male ?

What is (in your opinion or culture) female ?

It's annoying that I've already typed so much and now I don't have it in me to actually answer the question on-topic. 🙄

Lil devils x:
As some are aware, I come from a maternal culture...

Without meaning to be a grammar nazi, it's "matriarchal", not maternal. No offence intended.

Lil devils x:
Physically, the female brain and the male brain are actually different:

Well it isn't often these days to hear someone say that there are differences between the sexes. I was under the impression the current line was more that they were the same.

Lil devils x:
I still think it can be rough on boys who will still be made fun of by other boys for doing or liking girl stuff due to how girls are "perceived as weak"... I would very much like to see that change. Boys should be able to have easy bake ovens and dollhouses as much as girls should be able to play lego and video games...

They can have anything they want, but it won't do them any favours in the long run. If they want to be successful in later life, in particular with members of the opposite sex, playing with dolls, wearing dresses and painting their nails won't get them a girlfriend (unless she's into that). Despite whatever people say, attraction is still a primal thing. Men have status among their peers and women are attracted to that, so there is an evolutionary drive to be masculine.

I would put it into the same kinda category as "fat acceptance" among women in particular. No one objects to people believing anything they want to believe, but a good mother would try to keep her daughter slim and attractive if she wants her to find a good match later in life. That is not to say larger women cannot be attractive (I've dated two and cared for both a great deal), nor that they cannot find a good husband. But a slimmer woman will have a lot more choice. Same with the boys...they can play with dolls, but in the long run it would be kinder to nix it if they are to have a better life in the future. Women don't even find men who act like boys attractive (for very long at least), let alone men who act like girls. It isn't something to be sad about, they aren't losing out, their lives would not be better for playing with the dolls and most boys wouldn't want to.

It's not quite the same as, but is skirting close to the whole weird thing with people who want to raise their kids genderless, or specifically give their sons girls toys and clothes... Those people I would go as far as to accuse of committing actual child abuse and would absolutely support social services removing a child from the care of those people for the sake of their future wellbeing.

Satinavian:

BreakfastMan:
So like, are you looking for an objective definition of "masculine" or "feminine" behavior? Because what falls into either category can vary wildly by culture.

No, i am looking for a couple of subjective opinions to see if there is some overlap or not and maybe if the answers do vary depending on where my fellow escapists are from or if individual differences let regional/cultural ones vanish. And also to see if we are actually remotely talking about the same thing when we say masculine or feminine.

So far i got exactly one answer and some other person admitting he doesn't really know, which is overall kinda disappointing.

If you want that, you should probably look at the scholarly research done by sociologists and anthropologists on gender and gender roles across history and culture. I don't think you will get anything remotely in-depth from just asking randos on a forum.

KingsGambit:

Satinavian:
my problems are with the two big ones, male and female.

Not "the two big ones". The two "only ones".

What makes you say that there are only two?

EDIT:

KingsGambit:
The only truth is that the vast majority of the world would not agree that they are separate or that there are more than two genders.

lol, want to bet my dude?

KingsGambit:

Satinavian:
my problems are with the two big ones, male and female.

Not "the two big ones". The two "only ones".

Satinavian:
We all know the definitions of genders which seperates them from sexes ( where all the biologigal stuff gets in ) .... let's just focus on gender alone and ignore sexes.

This is extremely disingenuous. No we don't all "know the definitions of genders" or accept that they are separate from the sexes. Knowing the definition or not, you cannot handwave something to be so obviously factual that everyone readily accepts it. The only truth is that the vast majority of the world would not agree that they are separate or that there are more than two genders. I believe there are two sexes, dictated by biology. Excepting for the minuscule fraction of actual intersex people in the world, strangely the ones who are never actually discussed or given any say in the discussion, it is known in science and consistent across the known world in every culture, race and socioeconomic background that there are physical and other differences between the sexes and that the things which are male and female are obvious to anyone with eyes.

It is dishonest to divorce them, it is further dishonest to suggest that everyone readily accepts it. Canada, New York and Facebook might recognise 30 or 60 or however many made-up genders they want, but that doesn't make it less ridiculous to non far-left people who don't buy any of it. I will accept that people may not be happy in their skin, I will accept that people may believe they are anything they want and I will defend their right to believe it. But I will not accept other people insisting that I need to accept that they are the thing they claim to be when I can see that it isn't true.

Satinavian:
What is (in your opinion or culture) male ?

What is (in your opinion or culture) female ?

It's annoying that I've already typed so much and now I don't have it in me to actually answer the question on-topic. 🙄

Lil devils x:
As some are aware, I come from a maternal culture...

Without meaning to be a grammar nazi, it's "matriarchal", not maternal. No offence intended.

Lil devils x:
Physically, the female brain and the male brain are actually different:

Well it isn't often these days to hear someone say that there are differences between the sexes. I was under the impression the current line was more that they were the same.

Lil devils x:
I still think it can be rough on boys who will still be made fun of by other boys for doing or liking girl stuff due to how girls are "perceived as weak"... I would very much like to see that change. Boys should be able to have easy bake ovens and dollhouses as much as girls should be able to play lego and video games...

They can have anything they want, but it won't do them any favours in the long run. If they want to be successful in later life, in particular with members of the opposite sex, playing with dolls, wearing dresses and painting their nails won't get them a girlfriend (unless she's into that). Despite whatever people say, attraction is still a primal thing. Men have status among their peers and women are attracted to that, so there is an evolutionary drive to be masculine.

I would put it into the same kinda category as "fat acceptance" among women in particular. No one objects to people believing anything they want to believe, but a good mother would try to keep her daughter slim and attractive if she wants her to find a good match later in life. That is not to say larger women cannot be attractive (I've dated two and cared for both a great deal), nor that they cannot find a good husband. But a slimmer woman will have a lot more choice. Same with the boys...they can play with dolls, but in the long run it would be kinder to nix it if they are to have a better life in the future. Women don't even find men who act like boys attractive (for very long at least), let alone men who act like girls. It isn't something to be sad about, they aren't losing out, their lives would not be better for playing with the dolls and most boys wouldn't want to.

It's not quite the same as, but is skirting close to the whole weird thing with people who want to raise their kids genderless, or specifically give their sons girls toys and clothes... Those people I would go as far as to accuse of committing actual child abuse and would absolutely support social services removing a child from the care of those people for the sake of their future wellbeing.

No I actually meant to say Maternal as in :

ma?ter?nal
denoting feelings associated with or typical of a mother; motherly.

AS that is actually the foundation of our culture, not just that linage was through the mother, but the social order, priorities, values, and numerous other aspects from everything in what is expected of a work environment to what is considered most beneficial and valuable to the community. It actually affected how everything came to be, the details and the "whole picture." there are huge differences between maternal and paternal cultures even in every small detail, not just a matter of decision making and linage. What females find attractive in a male greatly varies, and no is not based on one cultures definition of what it means to be a man. In our culture women were repulsed by the warrior, and in other cultures women were attracted to the warrior. Even in one culture what individual women find attractive in a mate greatly varies.

Whether or not it is beneficial for boys to enjoy things considered for girls is circumstantial. Take Gordon Ramsey, his cooking as a child paid off well, even though that is something often considered " for girls". At least the boys playing with easy bake ovens have role models to show that cooking is not just for girls anymore, and he is happily married as well.

There are plenty of men in the Fashion industry, cosmetic industry, architecture and interior design that strongly disagree with your assessment that these activities are not beneficial to boys. Just as girls designing their dollhouses teach them skills they can use throughout their lives, it can do the same for boys. Boys designing barbie clothes can help provide them skills to expand into making real fashions in their future. All of these things can be very beneficial to them in the long run if that is where their passions lie.

I do not agree with forcing children to have to play with boy or girl stuff, but instead let them decide what they want to do and allow them to develop their skills how they see fit. There is nothing wrong with letting them play with what they feel they are most interested in. There is harm though in telling them they shouldn't play with something because " it's not for them" simply because you feel it " it's for boys" or " it's for girls". There is no point in doing that to them or to deny them their interests.

EDIT:
In addition, a mother wanting their child to be healthy has NOTHING to do with "pleasing a mate" and everything to do with wanting your child to be healthy so they are not sick or die prematurely. In fact, there are plenty of men out there that actually try to " fatten their girlfriends" because they are " into" that. Definitions of beauty also greatly vary between cultures, and in some cultures skinny is seen as gross. I was always told I was " too skinny" growing up, not the other way around and everyone was always trying to feed me more. A small waist in our culture was seen as unattractive, yet in western culture they hired me as an in store model. Go figure.

What is Gender to me?

An Agreement.

Obvious biological differences aside, we're still human. Have the same needs in terms of keeping us aside, and sometimes the same drives for procreation. And hell, not even the last part all the time. An aside, but my Asexual People, stand up! I don't get how you don't like sex, but I see you out there doing your own thing.

A lot of people cite strength differences, muscle mass, and all this as reason why genders are important. The amount of people who use their physical strength on a day to day basis in this modern world is way less than you think. Not saying they aren't out there, but after I stopped being a personal trainer, the fact that I can bench well over two hundred pounds never came up in a job interview.

I can get behind the idea of Gender being fluid, but it's not something I particularly see for myself. That doesn't matter, anyway.

Gender nowadays are a set of rules. If you follow them, we know how to think about you. And that makes socializing easier because people don't like to think. A man is big and strong, a woman is dainty and emotional. All is well, one less thing to worry about.

But as a trainer, I dealt with women who could far out lift 95% of the club we were in. I met men who are emotional beyond what the worst stereotype of a woman is. We have enough misfiring or imbalance of brain chemicals, societal/cultural differences, different personal experiences, different desires... that literally I'll hold onto my preconceptions with every new person I meet and I'll just erase and add what they associate themselves with when I learn about them.

I'm not here to dictate how people are, and it's not up to me to monitor them. I experience every one of the 7+ Billion people for who they say they are, not for what I tell them they should be.

There words, you can define them however you want. Word meaning aren't set in stone, for example you can ask people to translate some word into percentage (for example: likely would be 80%, certainly would be 90% and so on) and you'll find a large variation between peoples. And that's an easy example. Ultimately the answer is: what do most people can agree.

As far as whether gender is experience by people, we just don't have the technology to answer that yet. We don't really know how the brain work, we don't have good tool to scan it. Once we do we'll have an answer, but it'll be a rather boring one that won't satisfy peoples. Especially since it won't actually take into account what the people themselves claim (same way somebody can claim there not sick, if the test show they are, they are, no matter they say).

You know, I used to go by what I called the Kindergarten Cop definition but the past few years of my life has shown me that many people find that explanation inadequate.

BreakfastMan:
What makes you say that there are only two?

Because that is how many there are. I accept there are actual intersex people but I do not believe for an instant that one can "identify" as another thing and be that other thing because they "feel" that way. Now if someone goes thru surgery, I will accept them as a trans-person, but they cannot be a natural member of the opposite sex and never can be. I understand genes and DNA and have eyes that see.

BreakfastMan:

KingsGambit:
The only truth is that the vast majority of the world would not agree that they are separate or that there are more than two genders.

lol, want to bet my dude?

I don't want to take your money, but thank you for the kind offer. In seriousness, the number of people who believe the 30 gender thing or whatever it is is tiny. It may well be increasing, but it's a very western issue and only bandied about the the far left. The majority of the world are unaware of, uninterested in or too busy living their lives to care about this nonsense. Even the people who hear about it in the west just don't care about the debate or what people who believe it think. As long as it doesn't affect their lives or families, it's irrelevant.

I put people who believe in the whole 30 gender thing (is it still 30 or has it changed?) in the same ballpark as those who tattoo scales on themselves and surgically bifurcate their tongues to be lizards, or that guy who surgically altered his body to be an elf. They're weird but they can believe whatever the heck they want as long as I don't have to deal with their brand of crazy. I would defend anyone's right to believe what they want to believe or do whatever they want to their bodies, but reserve the right to avoid having such people in my life and considering them to be rather misguided.

Lil devils x:
No i actually meant to say Maternal as in :

ma?ter?nal
denoting feelings associated with or typical of a mother; motherly.

AS that is actually the foundation of our culture, not just that linage was through the mother, but the social order, priorities, values

Without meaning to belabour the point any longer than necessary, you wrote

where women traditionally were the ones who owned property, conduct business and are responsible for the economy and the man takes the woman's family name upon marriage.

That is the dictionary definition of "matriarchal", a culture or society where women have the dominant role. Maternal specifically refers to mothers, rather than women or female. Anyway, I've made the point, I don't mean offence by it but it is a significant difference and I mean this by way of helpfully educating for the next time you make the same point in another time and place.

Lil devils x:
Whether or not it is beneficial for boys to enjoy things considered for girls is circumstantial. Take Gordon Ramsey, his cooking as a child paid off well, even though that is something often considered " for girls".

Cooking is not considered for girls. Men have been cooking since fire existed and many top chefs around the world are men. They are celebrated, people travel the world to eat at their restaurants.

Lil devils x:
There are plenty of men in the Fashion industry,

I'll tell Ralph Lauren, Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger they're allowed to continue then.

Lil devils x:
cosmetic industry,

Right...altho there are probably more women.

Lil devils x:
architecture

You're joking here, right?

Lil devils x:
and interior design that strongly disagree with your assessment that these activities are not beneficial to boys.

I didn't realise these things were for girls quite honestly. I also don't see why a boy needs to play with a dollhouse or wear a dress to start a clothes line or construct a skyscraper. Come to think of it, I don't see why a girl needs to play with a dollhouse to want to pursue a career as above either.

There are some girlish pursuits that can serve men very well. Male ballet dancers for example are in exceptionally high demand, more so if they're very good. There are so many female ballerinas and so few male that while it's so momentously difficult for the ladies to get work, men are all but guaranteed a job and get to work in an environment where they meet a lot of attractive women.

But for most boys, playing with dolls will lead to bullying, rejection by girls and a much harder life than is needed. There's nothing wrong with encouraging boys to be boys, they will be better for it as teens and adults. There are differences between the sexes and while it sounds warm and cuddly to say they should do what they want, that doesn't make it good for a child's future if it means they have fewer friends, dating prospects or other opportunities.

While boys and girls develop similarly as young children and there are many overlaps in interests at that age, they will develop differently later and benefit from different things as they grow. Treating them as genderless, putting a boy in a dress or denying him the ability to pursue the things we all would consider boyish IMO is cruel and unfair to the child and may well do irreparable harm down the line. And the same goes for girls, although they can generally get away with tomboyishness for a lot longer. A good parent should want to give their kids the best start in life so when they reach maturity they are healthy, sociable, motivated and have the best chance at living a fulfilled life of their own, be it in a career, relationship or both.

KingsGambit:

BreakfastMan:
What makes you say that there are only two?

Because that is how many there are.

So your answer is... just because?

BreakfastMan:

KingsGambit:
The only truth is that the vast majority of the world would not agree that they are separate or that there are more than two genders.

lol, want to bet my dude?

I don't want to take your money, but thank you for the kind offer. In seriousness, the number of people who believe the 30 gender thing or whatever it is is tiny. It may well be increasing, but it's a very western issue and only bandied about the the far left. The majority of the world are unaware of, uninterested in or too busy living their lives to care about this nonsense. Even the people who hear about it in the west just don't care about the debate or what people who believe it think. As long as it doesn't affect their lives or families, it's irrelevant.

I put people who believe in the whole 30 gender thing (is it still 30 or has it changed?) in the same ballpark as those who tattoo scales on themselves and surgically bifurcate their tongues to be lizards, or that guy who surgically altered his body to be an elf. They're weird but they can believe whatever the heck they want as long as I don't have to deal with their brand of crazy. I would defend anyone's right to believe what they want to believe or do whatever they want to their bodies, but reserve the right to avoid having such people in my life and considering them to be rather misguided.

you didn't say "30 genders". You said "more than two". Again, would you bet money on that?

Lil devils x:
Snippersnapper

Whenever you talk about this I always get the feeling you were put in a community that has a very shallow understanding of western gender roles and enforces them with an almost culty fervor, like, hot damn, if that is where you grew up then you have my sympathies.
Likewise, I'm also intrigued as to what your own culture actually is/was, by what you describe, it sounds like an intensely agricultural one with little reliance on hunting and very little exposure to warfare, hence why warriors are valued so little.
Just my speculation, by the way, do correct me if I miss the mark by a mile. ^^"

As far as my experience goes, the mark of a "real man" is not their aggressiveness or strength, it's self-sufficiency and their value to the people around them, their family and community, everything else like social standing and prominence are just results of these values.
On the other hand, women don't have to prove themselves as "real women" but have similar virtues all the same, womanhood is something you grow into and your social standing is likewise dependent on your value to the community and your family, they are not expected to be self-sufficient as much (they have a good man for that) but have a greater emphasis on social and mediative skills, they are the moral center of the community.

As a personal sidenote, I always thought what makes a "real man" is mostly decided by women and enforced by the men that relate to it, may also be wrong but that is my personal experience. ;P

BreakfastMan:

you didn't say "30 genders". You said "more than two". Again, would you bet money on that?

Look, there's a meme t-shirt that says there are only two genders, so it has to be true

CM156:

BreakfastMan:

you didn't say "30 genders". You said "more than two". Again, would you bet money on that?

Look, there's a meme t-shirt that says there are only two genders, so it has to be true

thanks I would like to die now

BreakfastMan:

CM156:

BreakfastMan:

you didn't say "30 genders". You said "more than two". Again, would you bet money on that?

Look, there's a meme t-shirt that says there are only two genders, so it has to be true

thanks I would like to die now

Another #lib #owned #epicstyle

The culture war has gotten stupid. Very stupid.

BreakfastMan:
snip

Just say what you're trying to say, I don't know what you're talking about. I think you're trying to be clever or insulting but I can't work it out. Do you have a point or argument or did you just want to be rude?

KingsGambit:

BreakfastMan:
snip

Just say what you're trying to say, I don't know what you're talking about. I think you're trying to be clever or insulting but I can't work it out. Do you have a point or argument or did you just want to be rude?

Just there is some extra reading you might want to do. Like about the indian Hijra, for starters. And the (many) other instances throughout the world of cultures that recognized more than 2 genders.

CM156:

BreakfastMan:

CM156:

Look, there's a meme t-shirt that says there are only two genders, so it has to be true

thanks I would like to die now

Another #lib #owned #epicstyle

The culture war has gotten stupid. Very stupid.

You know what this means. I must now work to get you fired from your place of employment for posting the bad memes.

BreakfastMan:

CM156:

BreakfastMan:

thanks I would like to die now

Another #lib #owned #epicstyle

The culture war has gotten stupid. Very stupid.

You know what this means. I must now work to get you fired from your place of employment for posting the bad memes.

You can't get me fired if I don't have a job!

And you can't get me disowned by my family if they're more reactionary than I am!

KingsGambit:

BreakfastMan:
What makes you say that there are only two?

Because that is how many there are. I accept there are actual intersex people but I do not believe for an instant that one can "identify" as another thing and be that other thing because they "feel" that way. Now if someone goes thru surgery, I will accept them as a trans-person, but they cannot be a natural member of the opposite sex and never can be. I understand genes and DNA and have eyes that see.

BreakfastMan:

KingsGambit:
The only truth is that the vast majority of the world would not agree that they are separate or that there are more than two genders.

lol, want to bet my dude?

I don't want to take your money, but thank you for the kind offer. In seriousness, the number of people who believe the 30 gender thing or whatever it is is tiny. It may well be increasing, but it's a very western issue and only bandied about the the far left. The majority of the world are unaware of, uninterested in or too busy living their lives to care about this nonsense. Even the people who hear about it in the west just don't care about the debate or what people who believe it think. As long as it doesn't affect their lives or families, it's irrelevant.

I put people who believe in the whole 30 gender thing (is it still 30 or has it changed?) in the same ballpark as those who tattoo scales on themselves and surgically bifurcate their tongues to be lizards, or that guy who surgically altered his body to be an elf. They're weird but they can believe whatever the heck they want as long as I don't have to deal with their brand of crazy. I would defend anyone's right to believe what they want to believe or do whatever they want to their bodies, but reserve the right to avoid having such people in my life and considering them to be rather misguided.

Lil devils x:
No i actually meant to say Maternal as in :

ma?ter?nal
denoting feelings associated with or typical of a mother; motherly.

AS that is actually the foundation of our culture, not just that linage was through the mother, but the social order, priorities, values

Without meaning to belabour the point any longer than necessary, you wrote

where women traditionally were the ones who owned property, conduct business and are responsible for the economy and the man takes the woman's family name upon marriage.

That is the dictionary definition of "matriarchal", a culture or society where women have the dominant role. Maternal specifically refers to mothers, rather than women or female. Anyway, I've made the point, I don't mean offence by it but it is a significant difference and I mean this by way of helpfully educating for the next time you make the same point in another time and place.

Lil devils x:
Whether or not it is beneficial for boys to enjoy things considered for girls is circumstantial. Take Gordon Ramsey, his cooking as a child paid off well, even though that is something often considered " for girls".

Cooking is not considered for girls. Men have been cooking since fire existed and many top chefs around the world are men. They are celebrated, people travel the world to eat at their restaurants.

Lil devils x:
There are plenty of men in the Fashion industry,

I'll tell Ralph Lauren, Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger they're allowed to continue then.

Lil devils x:
cosmetic industry,

Right...altho there are probably more women.

Lil devils x:
architecture

You're joking here, right?

Lil devils x:
and interior design that strongly disagree with your assessment that these activities are not beneficial to boys.

I didn't realise these things were for girls quite honestly. I also don't see why a boy needs to play with a dollhouse or wear a dress to start a clothes line or construct a skyscraper. Come to think of it, I don't see why a girl needs to play with a dollhouse to want to pursue a career as above either.

There are some girlish pursuits that can serve men very well. Male ballet dancers for example are in exceptionally high demand, more so if they're very good. There are so many female ballerinas and so few male that while it's so momentously difficult for the ladies to get work, men are all but guaranteed a job and get to work in an environment where they meet a lot of attractive women.

But for most boys, playing with dolls will lead to bullying, rejection by girls and a much harder life than is needed. There's nothing wrong with encouraging boys to be boys, they will be better for it as teens and adults. There are differences between the sexes and while it sounds warm and cuddly to say they should do what they want, that doesn't make it good for a child's future if it means they have fewer friends, dating prospects or other opportunities.

While boys and girls develop similarly as young children and there are many overlaps in interests at that age, they will develop differently later and benefit from different things as they grow. Treating them as genderless, putting a boy in a dress or denying him the ability to pursue the things we all would consider boyish IMO is cruel and unfair to the child and may well do irreparable harm down the line. And the same goes for girls, although they can generally get away with tomboyishness for a lot longer. A good parent should want to give their kids the best start in life so when they reach maturity they are sociable, motivated and have the best chance at living a fulfilled life of their own, be it in a career, relationship or both.

If cooking is seen as masculine, where are the easy bake ovens for boys? Why are they pink and next to the baby dolls? Why are cooking training tools for children marketed as a " girls only" toy rather than made to appeal to both boys and girls since cooking is beneficial to both boys and girls?

Of course Dollhouses are seen as a learning tool for design, as that is exactly what girls are doing with them. Girls design , build and decorate their dollhouses in the same way you would build and decorate models to show your work. Architect and design models are not much different than doll houses in the end. You can learn those skills as a child designing and decorating your dollhouse.
This is an architect model kit:
image
This is a dollhouse kit:
image
These are skills they are learning they will be able to utilize in the future.
As for Dolls and fashion, why do you think they are actually called "fashion dolls"?

Designers have often cited Barbie as the plaything that originally perked their interest in design. Changing her clothes and picking out her accessories were just the first steps in successful careers designing runway shows. To show their appreciation, dozens of designers have partnered with Barbie over the years to create tiny outfits exclusively for the doll. Christian Dior, Diane Von Furstenberg and Burberry are just a few of the labels that have dreamt up outfits for the most popular doll in history.

Just scroll through those barbies and you will see tons of men who designed their outfits:
http://time.com/4193374/see-barbies-most-fabulous-fashion-designer-collaborations/
He does not seem to think Barbies are just for girls either.
image

Yes, there are plenty of men in the cosmetics industry.In fact most of the major brands were developed by MEN. You are hard pressed to actually find any products in the supermarket developed by women. Loreal was founded by Eugiene Schueller, Maybelline was created by Thomas Lyle Williams, Francis J. Townsend brought us Noxema and Covergirl, e.l.f. Cosmetics was founded by Joseph Shamah and Scott Vincent Borba, Cindy Crawford's husband developed her makeup and skincare line. And the list goes on and on. Just walk around the grocery store, pharmacy, Target or Walmart and read the labels there and look who created them. It was overwhelmingly MEN. Men that did pretty well for themselves doing " girly" things.

CM156:

BreakfastMan:

CM156:

Another #lib #owned #epicstyle

The culture war has gotten stupid. Very stupid.

You know what this means. I must now work to get you fired from your place of employment for posting the bad memes.

You can't get me fired if I don't have a job!

And you can't get me disowned by my family if they're more reactionary than I am!

Well, I guess I will just complain about you not being banned from twitter then.

BreakfastMan:

CM156:

BreakfastMan:

You know what this means. I must now work to get you fired from your place of employment for posting the bad memes.

You can't get me fired if I don't have a job!

And you can't get me disowned by my family if they're more reactionary than I am!

Well, I guess I will just complain about you not being banned from twitter then.

Have we become parodies of our own respective political views?

I'm on so many levels of irony, I don't even know what my own opinions are anymore.

CM156:

BreakfastMan:

CM156:

You can't get me fired if I don't have a job!

And you can't get me disowned by my family if they're more reactionary than I am!

Well, I guess I will just complain about you not being banned from twitter then.

Have we become parodies of our own respective political views?

I'm on so many levels of irony, I don't even know what my own opinions are anymore.

Nah, the parody of my political views resembles something more like Jason Unruhue.

I went to an all-boys Catholic highschool, run by Monks, and their goal wasn't to just teach, but to raise and tutor gentlemen. So I've drawn a lot of what I view as masculine from their teachings. Now before I list what I believe, I want to state clearly that by no means am I saying all gendered males must be this way, nor gendered female be excluded from any action or practice. I do not know what it means to be female, so I won't bother guessing where the overlaps are and the distinctions are.

To me males are:
Brave. Stand up for those who cannot stand for themselves. The world is filled with bullies. Do something about it.
Honest. Have the courage of your convictions. Lying is cowardly, and you're brave. don't lie, don't cheat, accept the consequences of your actions.
Helpful. Offer to help anyone with anything. When I walk through the grocery store, i ask other customers if they need assistance. About 1 in 10 take me up and ask me to get something off the shelf.
Respectful, but not meek. Sir and Ma'am go a long way, but don't let strangers completely walk over you.
Healthy. This one I'll admit could be controversial in that everyone is differently-abled, but I've always held firm to healthy body, healthy mind. I stay fit, and work out regularly. A rule of thumb is stay fit enough when someone asks you to help them move, you can be a legitimate mover to help with even the heaviest things.
Punctual. Five minutes either side is okay, but if your a friend asks you to be at the move at 10, 1030 isn't acceptable.
Kind. Pet the puppy. You'll never regret it.
Forgive, but don't forget. If someone breaks your trust, forgive them. But keep it mind if you ever trust them again.
Hard working. This one is more a general 'good person' bit, but it was a teaching so it goes in.
Well educated/read. Do not brag. There's no point. But if someone quotes Shakespeare, know that its Shakespeare. Also read the Divine Comedy. Its great!
Lighthearted. Don't diminish someone, but unless the situation is grim grrr serious, take it in stride. Be relaxed, easy-going.
Be Nick Wilde, with a heart of Judy Hopps.

Combustion Kevin:

Lil devils x:
Snippersnapper

Whenever you talk about this I always get the feeling you were put in a community that has a very shallow understanding of western gender roles and enforces them with an almost culty fervor, like, hot damn, if that is where you grew up then you have my sympathies.
Likewise, I'm also intrigued as to what your own culture actually is/was, by what you describe, it sounds like an intensely agricultural one with little reliance on hunting and very little exposure to warfare, hence why warriors are valued so little.
Just my speculation, by the way, do correct me if I miss the mark by a mile. ^^"

As far as my experience goes, the mark of a "real man" is not their aggressiveness or strength, it's self-sufficiency and their value to the people around them, their family and community, everything else like social standing and prominence are just results of these values.
On the other hand, women don't have to prove themselves as "real women" but have similar virtues all the same, womanhood is something you grow into and your social standing is likewise dependent on your value to the community and your family, they are not expected to be self-sufficient as much (they have a good man for that) but have a greater emphasis on social and mediative skills, they are the moral center of the community.

As a personal sidenote, I always thought what makes a "real man" is mostly decided by women and enforced by the men that relate to it, may also be wrong but that is my personal experience. ;P

Actually you are pretty accurate. We moved to Texas and the heart of the Evangelical Bible belt, so yes, "culty" is exactly right.

I think what people in western culture have decided of "what makes a real man" has been decided by men, rather than women. Women just have to deal with it as they have dealt with so many other things in the west. It is created by and enforced by men.

Gender is <(checks notes)> not physical. That confuses those with rigid beliefs and strong preconceptions. Fluid, malleable examples are part of all inescapable society. Anecdotal contribution might help yes.

Kings Gambit said:

Lil devils x:
Physically, the female brain and the male brain are actually different:

Well it isn't often these days to hear someone say that there are differences between the sexes. I was under the impression the current line was more that they were the same.

I think the current thinking is that they are generally similar with some differences. The basic structure is the same but some areas are bigger in different sexes. Eg. Bigger Corpus Collosum in women, bigger motor control areas in men. When people were railing against the difference in the sexes decades ago, it was against things like "women can't maths due to their brain" becuase it was fundamentally not true and was more about men making sure women stayed away from their jobs, and women enforcing 'the family lifestyle.' I.e. Stay at home mum.

I remember in the 90s that there was a general medical consensus that women were fatter than men. It came down to a study in the 50s that proved this. The problem was that it wasn't replicated until the early 2000s and found the initial claim to be false. But women are still now trained to be worried about how much fat they have on their body. All from an incorrect study. A similar study was a damaging for women in Maths that has now been proven false.

When people point out inequities, there seems to be a push to extremism. For example, when there were debates about women being on the front lines during war, a typical comment would be that women can't keep up with men. The army would never, for any reason, give up all requirements for entering the army. And it would mean that more men would naturally be on the front lines due to men generally being stronger. Another example would be the law that medical professionals can't tell a father about the birth of a baby unless permission is given. Obviously, this law is to protect vulnerable women, like rape or incest victims. But it means that if you had a one night stand with a stranger that resulted in a baby, a father might not know they are even born. The law was pushed to the extreme to some people's detriment

Satinavian:
snip

So, in order to understand what gender is it's first necessary to understand that we live in a transitional society (and that's true of practically any society on earth, at this point). We are moving from a society in which people believed that males and females were in essence different social classes because they were made (by God, in the European tradition) to perform specific tasks and roles, to a modern society with a scientific and rational understanding of physical sex. That means we also understand the limitations of physical sex better than people in the past. A few centuries ago, people could believe that it was natural for men and women to wear different clothes, for example (one 17th century source I use in my research is literally someone panicking that women were wearing doublets and this was going to destroy society).

So, when I say we live in a transitional society what I mean is that we still have elements of that "old order", but we can't just take it on faith like people could in the past. Some people still believe that people wearing the wrong clothes or men eating the wrong foods or women getting jobs will destroy society, but those people have to debate, they have to make their arguments persuasive to a population who is widely critical of any claim not backed up by rigorous science and knowledge.

"Gender" is a word we've appropriated to describe and try and make sense of this transitional state we are living in, where we know that what was traditionally believed was wrong, but almost everyone (on some level) still buys into it either consciously or unconsciously. We still tend to wear different clothes even though we (or most of us, anyway) know that we don't need to. We behave differently, even though most of us know it's not necessary, and we still tend to maintain a power structure between the sexes which renders them as distinct social classes, even though we mostly know it's an irrational way of organising society.

Masculinity and femininity do not have inherent qualities. What is taken as masculine and feminine will inevitably change over time and between different cultures, and even over different age groups, social classes, religious denominations or just about anything. Even just in terms of visual media, think of all the different ways men can be portrayed as "traditionally" masculine in our culture. They can be violent or antisocial, or hardworking and family oriented. Men can also be gendered as effeminate though, so neither is it the case that anything a man does is automatically masculine.

The reality is that there isn't a clear logic to what gender is, because gender ultimately isn't rational. It's the inheritance of an irrational view of the world, but it's a view that still matters so we study it.

Lil devils x:

That is actually very interesting, it really does highlight the differences between the native American cultures that have far less exposure to conflict (and highly ritualized battles if they do happen) and the European mainland that has seen raiders, invaders and conquerors with far greater frequency.
In the west, being a warrior is about self-sacrifice for the community, putting your neck on the line and facing horror so others won't have to, I can imagine that a culture where warfare has been a lot less common and a lot less devastating, the desire to willingly face it seems almost "sick" or undesirable.

I suppose they were lucky the Aztecs didn't expand north. ;P

War is often romanticized in hindsight, but it has always been considered a "necessary evil" in order to protect and serve one's community or state, from a western point of view, not commending your warriors for their sacrifice seems unjust, what is your opinion?

I think what people in western culture have decided of "what makes a real man" has been decided by men, rather than women. Women just have to deal with it as they have dealt with so many other things in the west. It is created by and enforced by men.

I'm inclined to disagree with this one, the most common thread you see throughout any human society is that the well being of women is the moral imperative above all, No functional society has ever allowed or even condoned harm to be done to their own women (Other tribes/outsiders tend not to be treated so kindly, man or woman).
Because of this, woman have always been the moral center of their communities whereas men became the formal authorities, to say that men decide everything in Western society just rings false to me since their morals primarily derive from what their mothers taught them, and their female peers decide what they desire from him in courtship, also informed by THEIR mother's upbringing.
In a sense, women are the flipside to the same cultural coin, always have been.

Which leads me to a different question, just what is the general position of men in your culture? since it's the women that own property, conduct business and (If I understand this right) govern the community, surely men are not JUST the laborers, right?
What does courtship look like traditionally?

evilthecat:

So, in order to understand what gender is it's first necessary to understand that we live in a transitional society (and that's true of practically any society on earth, at this point). We are moving from a society in which people believed that males and females were in essence different social classes because they were made (by God, in the European tradition) to perform specific tasks and roles, to a modern society with a scientific and rational understanding of physical sex. That means we also understand the limitations of physical sex better than people in the past. A few centuries ago, people could believe that it was natural for men and women to wear different clothes, for example (one 17th century source I use in my research is literally someone panicking that women were wearing doublets and this was going to destroy society).

So, when I say we live in a transitional society what I mean is that we still have elements of that "old order", but we can't just take it on faith like people could in the past. Some people still believe that people wearing the wrong clothes or men eating the wrong foods or women getting jobs will destroy society, but those people have to debate, they have to make their arguments persuasive to a population who is widely critical of any claim not backed up by rigorous science and knowledge.

"Gender" is a word we've appropriated to describe and try and make sense of this transitional state we are living in, where we know that what was traditionally believed was wrong, but almost everyone (on some level) still buys into it either consciously or unconsciously. We still tend to wear different clothes even though we (or most of us, anyway) know that we don't need to. We behave differently, even though most of us know it's not necessary, and we still tend to maintain a power structure between the sexes which renders them as distinct social classes, even though we mostly know it's an irrational way of organising society.

Masculinity and femininity do not have inherent qualities. What is taken as masculine and feminine will inevitably change over time and between different cultures, and even over different age groups, social classes, religious denominations or just about anything. Even just in terms of visual media, think of all the different ways men can be portrayed as "traditionally" masculine in our culture. They can be violent or antisocial, or hardworking and family oriented. Men can also be gendered as effeminate though, so neither is it the case that anything a man does is automatically masculine.

The reality is that there isn't a clear logic to what gender is, because gender ultimately isn't rational. It's the inheritance of an irrational view of the world, but it's a view that still matters so we study it.

'Irrational' makes the assumption that it wasn't actually put together or orchestrated in a methodical manner. Like Tudor England's derision of Queen Elizabeth I and how she acted. And these were people that were supposed to have been the educated men of Tudor England. The lengths by which people argued essentialism were downright fucking bizarre, but that doesn't mean on some level that they were utterly divorced from the nature of the relations that they wanted to see. For example, people didn't have the same types of qualms ofwomen on the throne on the continent.

On the continent they just called them terms like 'mad' and put them under house arrest. Which ... is arguably worse? I think the reality is the European treatent of women has a baseline awfulness that people had a vested interest in maintaining, and would do so through any argumentation that they could.

It's dangerous to assume the people that pushed these types of narratives were 'irrational' .... the people that believed it sincerely may have been, but the people orchestrating these narratives were simply wrong.

And being wrong is better an assumption than irrationality. Irrationality assumes reduced cognizance and wherewithal of what they were actually saying. Irrationality requires patience and good will ... someone being wrong requires a corrective hand. Someone being intentionally wrong is a moral failure.

Like Aristotle wasn't irrational about women's teeth. He was just a lazy shithead and wrong.

And the same exists now for trans people, in much the same reason as it's always been this way. Just, you know ...kind of hoping it doesn't take millenia of being wrong for ideas concerning that trans people actually exist to be set in stone inpeople's heads, and to actually remember that being trans presupposes their ideas of gender and sex to begin with that they grew up with. That people shouldn't make arguments to justify what they've been taught, as opposed to recognize trans people will naturally exist in spite of what they've been taught, and maybe that should bring into question their ideas of the human condition...?

Yeah, I know ... it's asking a lot, right?

Like, empiricism ... what is it good for? Nothing, that's wot ... Did you ever hear my theory on teeth? <.<

Combustion Kevin:

Lil devils x:

That is actually very interesting, it really does highlight the differences between the native American cultures that have far less exposure to conflict (and highly ritualized battles if they do happen) and the European mainland that has seen raiders, invaders and conquerors with far greater frequency.
In the west, being a warrior is about self-sacrifice for the community, putting your neck on the line and facing horror so others won't have to, I can imagine that a culture where warfare has been a lot less common and a lot less devastating, the desire to willingly face it seems almost "sick" or undesirable.

I suppose they were lucky the Aztecs didn't expand north. ;P

War is often romanticized in hindsight, but it has always been considered a "necessary evil" in order to protect and serve one's community or state, from a western point of view, not commending your warriors for their sacrifice seems unjust, what is your opinion?

I think what people in western culture have decided of "what makes a real man" has been decided by men, rather than women. Women just have to deal with it as they have dealt with so many other things in the west. It is created by and enforced by men.

I'm inclined to disagree with this one, the most common thread you see throughout any human society is that the well being of women is the moral imperative above all, No functional society has ever allowed or even condoned harm to be done to their own women (Other tribes/outsiders tend not to be treated so kindly, man or woman).
Because of this, woman have always been the moral center of their communities whereas men became the formal authorities, to say that men decide everything in Western society just rings false to me since their morals primarily derive from what their mothers taught them, and their female peers decide what they desire from him in courtship, also informed by THEIR mother's upbringing.
In a sense, women are the flipside to the same cultural coin, always have been.

Which leads me to a different question, just what is the general position of men in your culture? since it's the women that own property, conduct business and (If I understand this right) govern the community, surely men are not JUST the laborers, right?
What does courtship look like traditionally?

Western view of " well being of women" though is skewed by viewing women as being too weak and incapable to care for themselves, so the "Strong and fearless" man has to take care of them, not because they care about what the woman wants or is actually capable of. It was always about what the man wants the woman to be instead. Women were treated as property, not an equal person whose opinions and desires were just as important as their own. It has taken western women a great struggle to even be considered a person and not property in the first place.

Men defined what it was to "be a man" and then enforced that upon other men, otherwise it would be considered " manly" for men to talk about their feelings, to be respectful of women, even "in the locker room" , and to help women around the house, as that is what women WISH men would do. Even " The Rock" takes issue with man's definition of what it is to be a man:

https://www.askmen.com/news/sports/the-rock-talks-mental-health-and-toxic-masculinity.html

EDIT: More on the 500 yr old promise fulfilled:

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here