you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]SnowAssMan 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

How does any of that erase culture? Gender identity is like cultural identity, except it isn't as multi-dimensional, because there are only two options with varying degrees of emphasis on conformity to them. Why is it that girls do better on maths exams if, shortly before it starts, they are introduced to a female mathematician? How can she act as a better role model for girls, than a male one could?

It's called implicit bias for a reason. We're all sexist, only different in degrees of sexism. We don't notice our sexist tendencies. That's why a lot of studies on sexist implicit bias have to be double-blind studies in order to actually record the bias accurately, because the examiners share the implicit biases with the participants!

If I said you have a cultural identity, I doubt you'd vigorously dispute it. What's the difference between cultural identity & gender identity that makes gender identity so implausible to you? Actually, ... thinking about it, you probably would argue that you don't have a cultural identity.

If you're a young, budding director in the US, people tell you that you'll be the next Spielberg (the hack lol), while in France the same talent in a young person would be likened to Goddard (someone who pushed the boundaries). French directors end up being more creative than directors from other cultures, because they had a superior role model.

[–]BiologyIsReal 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Honestly, the more I read you, the more I think you're mixing up or maybe combining the TRA's concept of "gender identity" with the feminist's concept of gender.

[–]SnowAssMan 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Gender is masculinity & femininity. Gender identity is what Simone de Beauvoir was talking about when she said "one is not born but becomes a woman":

"That formula [one is not born but made a woman] is the basis of all my theories & it’s meaning is very simple: that being a woman is not a natural fact. It’s a result of a certain history. There is no biological or psychological destiny that defines a woman as such. She is the product of a history, of civilisation, first of all, which has resulted in her current status. And secondary for each individual woman of her personal history in particular, that of her childhood. This determines her as a woman, creates in her something which is not at all innate, or an essence, something which has been called the “eternal feminine”, or femininity. The more we study the psychology of children the deeper we delve, the more evident it becomes that baby girls are manufactured to become women […] Long before a child is conscious, the way it is breastfed, or held, or rocked etc. inscribes in its body what might later appear a destiny”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3u1A0Mrjjw

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Did Simone de Beauvoir ever used the term "gender identity"? I'll confess I'm not well-read in feminist theory or philosophy, which is why I usually stick to biology. However, to me in this paragraph she is talking about gender roles, not "gender identity". It's late here, so I'll watch the video later.