Both: Do you believe there are sexual components to masculinity and femininity?

submitted by worried19 from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Juniperius 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Certainly it is possible for things to be complementary and not hierarchical. Your examples of individual vs. group work and guitar and drums are good illustrations of that. But you explicitly link masculinity with dominance and femininity with submission, which is the precise definition of hierarchy: this person uses force to impose his will on that person, this person gets his way and that person is just acted upon like a non-sentient object.

I know kinksters have contorted themselves into thinking that the submissive person is actually in charge, but even if that's maybe sort of true in their little games, it's not how hierarchy works in the real world, and it's not how masculinity and femininity play out in the real world.

Saying that women are put in an inferior position because of stupid and evil dominance bullshit means things like, if a man gets a better job in a different town, his wife may be expected to leave her life, home, and family to go with him, and not the other way around, because her silly little job doesn't matter like his big masculine job, and her will has to give way to his.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

Certainly it is possible for things to be complementary and not hierarchical. Your examples of individual vs. group work and guitar and drums are good illustrations of that.

But you explicitly link masculinity with dominance and femininity with submission, which is the precise definition of hierarchy: this person uses force to impose his will on that person, this person gets his way and that person is just acted upon like a non-sentient object.

Sure. I agree.

I am offering two aspects on this.

Gender as empty flag that is complementary and completed by culture.

Nothing to do with power but always emergent and always different. Would you think that possible?

A more awkward version means that it has innate behaviours or even slightly innate gendered tendencies.

Which might include that male trait for dominance and aggression.

Maybe, maybe not.

It's certainly there culturally across lots of cultures. Stronger or weaker.

I can see that would be politically difficult. It's not like it puts me in a good position.

I know kinksters have contorted themselves into thinking that the submissive person is actually in charge, but even if that's maybe sort of true in their little games, it's not how hierarchy works in the real world, and it's not how masculinity and femininity play out in the real world.

Right, so it isn't the real world.

Saying that women are put in an inferior position because of stupid and evil dominance bullshit means things like, if a man gets a better job in a different town, his wife may be expected to leave her life, home, and family to go with him, and not the other way around, because her silly little job doesn't matter like his big masculine job, and her will has to give way to his.

I'm not arguing against that to say it's a good thing. I'm not arguing for men to dominate women.

But I have to live with the world as it is.

For instance that US ebook erotica by popularity.

https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Kindle-Store-Erotica/zgbs/digital-text/157057011/?tf=1

Sure they can keep things in the bedroom but there must be some interaction with the real world.