heron61: (Dandy)
[personal profile] heron61
Here's an interesting and thankfully entirely non-transphobic article about a woman and her butch but definitively female-identified daughter

This article reminds me of various comments [personal profile] teaotter has made, that one huge problem with modern constructions of gender is that definitions of male and female have become increasingly narrow, and while we are both pleased that there's increasing awareness of transgendered, non-binary and bi-gendered people, there's absolutely no reason that acknowledging their existence needs to narrow gender categories.

Also, it doesn't look like that's the causation. Instead, it appears that both male and female gender norms began narrowing prior to the most recent surge in transgendered, non-binary and bi-gendered awareness, presumably as a backlash or reaction to both social pressures towards gender equality and growing acceptance of people who are not heterosexual. I'm assuming that at least part of the reason is straight cis people's fear of being assumed to be something other than straight and perhaps cis given that other options are now possible to openly discuss *sigh*.

However, despite such fears, not all male bodied people with gender presentations that don't conform to masculine norms (like me *waves*, with my proud self-definition as a fop and a sissy) are transgendered, non-binary, or bi-gendered (but some definitely are), and in fact, not all such male-bodied people are even gay (although many are).

Similarly, not all female bodied people with gender presentations that don't conform to feminine norms (like [personal profile] teaotter) are transgendered, non-binary, or bi-gendered (but some definitely are), and in fact, not all such female-bodied people are even lesbians (although many are).

Once again, we face the fact that there are no simple answers or formulas for human behavior – living creatures are complicated, and sentient ones are ever more so.

Date: 2017-04-21 07:00 pm (UTC)
graydon: (Default)
From: [personal profile] graydon
I don't think there has been any significant change in gender relations EXCEPT an expectation that men do child care for infants. (Which is very large, but also probably transient.)

I don't think contraception has a whole lot to do with that, and education does. (Rather like public sanitation is way more important than antibiotics to mortality expectations.) Contraception gets a lot of the blame but I think it's far more economically driven than a result of sexual possibility.

Generally, all of it is moot; expanding the presumptive prescriptive norm can't work (and we can see it failing now); that's one of the reasons it's such a wretchedly persistent social mechanism. Once you accept that things are measured by their distance from correctness you can't think your way out, you've got to ditch the axiom, and ditching childhood axioms isn't a practical expectation. People get violently determined to "restore order" to the position of their axiomatic norm and you get roundheads (after Elizabeth Gloriana) and early Victorian public morals (after the Regency) and so on.

There's alternative sets of axioms that don't start with a presumptive norm (which don't result in infinite arguments about taxonomies) but that in turn comes down to education, and look at how hard the reactionary forces work to prevent and control education. I don't know of very many working at a general public ethics that says "there is no good; there is no bad; there are results, and your preferences are not special".

September 2017

345 6789

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 22nd, 2017 05:20 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios