Discussion2 + 2 = 5

submitted by julesburm1891 from self.LGBDropTheT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]7874 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

See, you consider your definition to be the "actual" definition when it's the radical feminist one. It refers to masculinity and femininity (for example, the gender of a noun in a Romance language). But you consider it to be a hierarchy where masculine is above feminine, correct?

You're not accounting for the biological aspects. I guess you're going to tell me now that all psychological and behavioral differences between men and women are purely due to socialization? And the fact that prehomosexual (children who will grow up to be homosexual; pedantic because children don't have a sexual orientation) children are identified by a propensity towards cross-sex behaviors is what, socialization too??

"Brainsex" is reductive, inaccurate, and homophobic. But the fact remains than men and women have different average brain structures, and homosexuals tend to have brains that are more similar to the opposite sex. It doesn't mean that women are biologically wired to be in the kitchen and it doesn't mean homosexuals should be surgically altered at the expense of their health, well-being, and capacity for sexual pleasure to look more like the sex that typically has their gender, it just means that there are some psychological and behavioral differences between masculine people and feminine people and it's obvious in the real world.

And of course there are exceptions, but I'm speaking generally. This is the root of transgenderism and denying it isn't getting us anywhere. Homosexuals believing as young children (before ever feeling sexual urges) that they're a member of the opposite sex "trapped" in their bodies is a key tenet of their ideology.

Which isn't to say that nearly every single culture in the world doesn't prioritize men over women, and masculinity over femininity. That's patriarchy and it's real and a serious problem. But the solution isn't denial.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Please remove the term "mutilated" from your comment.

We do not allow that term to be used, per rule 4.

You can view transitioning however you want. But this sub represents LGB as a whole, and that perception does not represent LGB needs and concerns, only your personal feelings.

Send a message to all mods via ModMail if you edit your comment, so one of us can reinstate it: https://saidit.net/message/compose?to=LGBDropTheT

[–]7874 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Okay fixed

[–]Movellon[M] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Thanks!

[–]7874 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No problem :)

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

This is a wall of text so I'll only reply to small chunks.

No that is not the radical feminist definition of gender. It's rooted in second wave feminism which adopted the term from... I believe John Money. It's a combination of bimodal sex characteristics and binary social characteristics. Radical feminists completely ignore the biological aspect of gender and insist it's purely a social construct which is why i am not a radfem.

Edit to clarify. Gender is the social caste defined by the social expectations a specific society constructs around how each sex should participate in society. Things like "women should raise children" are highly biological where "women should wear pink" is purely social with zero biological reason.

[–]7874 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I separated it into paragraphs, but okay. You said you considered it a "social caste system", which I'm guessing means a hierarchy where masculinity is above femininity (which is the definition used by radical feminists), and didn't mention biological factors.

John Money is an insane pedophile and from what I've read, he intentionally tried to make the definition of "gender" nebulous so he could use it to justify his sick experiments.

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I'm not defending John Money but he is the originator of the term which became highly useful for second wave feminists to describe their civil rights battles.

[–]7874 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I understand that in nearly every society on Earth (and it's been this way since the beginning of written history), masculinity is prioritized over femininity, and since all men are assumed to be masculine and all women are assumed to be feminine, men are prioritized over women, but that's not the meaning of the word "gender", that's just gender dynamics socially and politically. Gender just refers to someone's state of being masculine or feminine, the way sex refers to someone's state of being either male or female.

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Gender is the system itself not an individual state of being. This is why no one can be a gender and why no one can define their own individual gender.

[–]7874 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

No it's not. "Gender" is a container with two categories: masculine or feminine. It's like sex. "Sex" is a container with two categories: male or female". I'm masculine. That's my gender. A noun can also have a gender in some languages. For example, in Spanish, the noun "la puerta" (door) has a gender, indicated by the article "la" and the "a" at the end (which doesn't always indicate femininity, but generally does). The gender of "la puerta" is feminine. People and things do have genders.

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

This is 100% a colloquialism that people applied to what they think gender meant because they didn't really understand the academic meaning of gender coming out of 2nd wave feminism. I understand that trying to explain this is more and more a lost cause since way too many people have internalized this type of definition.

[–]7874 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The word "gender" had a meaning before second-wave feminism, and it's the definition I stated. Second-wave feminists didn't invent the word. It already existed. They tried to redefine it poorly and it didn't stick.

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No that's not what I'm saying at all.

Obviously gender had a previous definition but also obviously English tends to apply the same spelling and pronunciation to multiple words.

They borrowed from the definition pertaining to grammar to create a new similar type of word. Grammatical gender refers to classification of words. Certain rules apply to the words only because of the arbitrary category. This carries over to the social version of the new word. It's a classification of people asked on sex.

Because it's a sex based classification, there are actually intrinsic factors that end up influencing the rules... Unlike the radfem idea that there is no biological connection.

The idea that gender = sex or = masculinity (whatever) is different because it wasn't the creation of a new word with the same spelling, it was a lack of understanding and misuse of the particular word. Unfortunately i think some of that misuse was intentional by TRAs in order to confuse public opinion and use of language. If enough of society misuses the word, we do end up shifting the definition. That's the case right now. Almost no one understands the actual definition and there are 5 different ideas floating around of what people think it means. This makes it extremely difficult to have a conversation because 5 people in the room use the word and misinterpret everyone else's statements.