UN: LGBTQ Equality In America "Not Within Reach"

[PGen98]

It’s called reality which is sorely lacking in today’s society.

No, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of what trans is by people who are deliberately ignorant and unwilling to educate themselves.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

No, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of what trans is by people who are deliberately ignorant and unwilling to educate themselves.

Nothing is misunderstood. They need true help but they aren’t truly getting it from the people who claim to care.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

I have to admit if Matt Walsh hadn’t come out with what is a women I would have never known just how far the left has gone for butchering children for profit and a political agenda. So thank you Matt!

 

[PGen98]

L

I have to admit if Matt Walsh hadn’t come out with what is a women I would have never known just how far the left has gone for butchering children for profit and a political agenda. So thank you Matt!

Ugh, that pathetic film that misses so many points and spends it's time slandering trans people. Absolute trash film.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

Because this is normal!


Men trying to breastfeed! Endless Mental illness.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

L

Ugh, that pathetic film that misses so many points and spends it's time slandering trans people. Absolute trash film.

The only thing that misses the point is a guy who doesn’t want to listen but seems pretty violent

 

[Webster]

Because this is normal!


Men trying to breastfeed! Endless Mental illness.

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

So you consider this normal and sane?

 

[Scarlet Rose]

Don’t care about improvement, we have only two sexes a made up term does nothing except encourage the insanity.

You are still not making the case for why the sociocultural and the biological are the same thing. Gender and sex are related but they are not the same. Gender refers to the sociocultural and sex refers to the biological. Keeping the sociocultural and biological as two separate concepts helps with cross-cultural and historical studies. It is useful for understanding, thinking about and explaining society.

No it doesn’t I’ve been very clear on what subject we were talking about you wandered to confuse the subject it’s been a common tactic lately with this topic in our society.

Our argument is over whether or not gender and sex are the same thing. The way you respond to my examples and arguments is critiquing them on the grounds that they are not biological. When they are literally sociocultural examples. I talk about gender having cross cultural and historical variance in how it is perceived and experienced. You then pretend that my examples are about sex.

That’s you, I’m not, I recognize no difference because people want to pretend.

It isn't about pretending. It is simply about the imperfect relationship between the biological and sociocultural. There can, and will be, mismatches between individuals in a society and the respective sociocultural system.

I’m and always have been talking strictly about one part of biology as per our discussion nothing else and not mixing up pretending something you can’t be. So in this conversation about the one subject here you can’t change your biology

This part of our conversation I was giving examples that were about generalized biology. So for your understanding, at this point I am not specifically talking about sex. I am talking about human biology in its generalized entirety. I hope that clears up the confusion.

Has never been part of my discussion, but I understand the need to confuse the subject at hand.

It is the exact opposite, it is necessary in order to clarify the subject at hand. Gender is a sociocultural concept and sex is a biological one. It is needed, therefore, on a general level to have an understanding of the relationship between the sociocultural and biological. My entire argument is based on the relationship between the two and how they mutually constitute each other. Gender is, after all, acquired through the dual processes of enculturation and embodiment.

 

[Scarlet Rose]

I truly hope one day you can educate yourself

I hope so too, since I think it is important to be familiar with the literature and data on topics you have a personal interest in. While it wasn't directed at me, I was inspired by the discussions here to further my learning on the subject of gender. That will be the final class towards the completion of my BA next year. A shame it isn't an anthropology one, but Human Development will do.

Learning outcomes​

• 1Compare and contrast theories of gender development across the lifespan.
• 2Analyse components of the contemporary sex-gender system in Aotearoa New Zealand.
• 3Appraise intersectional relationships with gender such as ethnicity, class, age, sexual orientation, ability, and body size.
• 4Critically reflect on one’s own gender development and current gender performance.

Learning outcomes can change before the start of the semester you are studying the course in.

 

[PGen98]

I hope so too, since I think it is important to be familiar with the literature and data on topics you have a personal interest in. While it wasn't directed at me, I was inspired by the discussions here to further my learning on the subject of gender. That will be the final class towards the completion of my BA next year. A shame it isn't an anthropology one, but Human Development will do.

That's amazing, I hope that your studies go well and that you push on with the study of gender, it's such an in-depth and rich subject! In spite of people who like to close their ears and eyes and believe we still live in the caveman era, gender is so diverse across cultures and it's so interesting to learn about the different roles in different societies. The fa'afafine in polynesian cultures, for instance, a necessary role in their culture that would be frowned upon in places such as the US. You've got a fantastic understanding of gender already, I wish you all the best moving forward!

 

[Scarlet Rose]

That's amazing, I hope that your studies go well and that you push on with the study of gender, it's such an in-depth and rich subject! In spite of people who like to close their ears and eyes and believe we still live in the caveman era, gender is so diverse across cultures and it's so interesting to learn about the different roles in different societies. The fa'afafine in polynesian cultures, for instance, a necessary role in their culture that would be frowned upon in places such as the US. You've got a fantastic understanding of gender already, I wish you all the best moving forward!

Thank you! Yes, definitely! It is an incredibly complex subject. Since I am so hooked on anthropology, I have predominantly understood it from their perspectives. A lot of invaluable cross cultural and historical work has been done on it. I particularly like the work of anthropologists like Roger Lancaster, I think it was his book The Trouble with Nature: Sex in Science and Popular culture that really started me thinking more critically about gender and sex. I have also read several books on the subject now. It is just unfortunate that most of my sources I refer to are physical books and it is quite troublesome to quote from them. Especially if I know they will just be called "fake..." Sexual Meanings: The Cultural Construction of Gender and Sexuality edited by Shrry Ortner and Harriet Whitehead is a really good collection of ethnographies which show the cross cultural variance in gender. The Cultural Construction of Sexuality edited by Pat Caplan was another good collection. Lesbian Sex Scandals: Sexual Practices, Identities, and Politics edited by Dawn Atkins another great collection. Like there is so much literature drawing on ethnographic work and research demonstrating the cross cultural and historical variance. Thank you though! I am looking forward to it!

 

[PGen98]

Thank you! Yes, definitely! It is an incredibly complex subject. Since I am so hooked on anthropology, I have predominantly understood it from their perspectives. A lot of invaluable cross cultural and historical work has been done on it. I particularly like the work of anthropologists like Roger Lancaster, I think it was his book The Trouble with Nature: Sex in Science and Popular culture that really started me thinking more critically about gender and sex. I have also read several books on the subject now. It is just unfortunate that most of my sources I refer to are physical books and it is quite troublesome to quote from them. Especially if I know they will just be called "fake..." Sexual Meanings: The Cultural Construction of Gender and Sexuality edited by Shrry Ortner and Harriet Whitehead is a really good collection of ethnographies which show the cross cultural variance in gender. The Cultural Construction of Sexuality edited by Pat Caplan was another good collection. Lesbian Sex Scandals: Sexual Practices, Identities, and Politics edited by Dawn Atkins another great collection. Like there is so much literature drawing on ethnographic work and research demonstrating the cross cultural and historical variance. Thank you though! I am looking forward to it!

I love and respect your passion for anthropology and, of course, gender. I got a little bit of a first hand crash course and the role of gender in society, but I have done my best to educate myself beyond that, as well, and what you learn when you really do your research is just phenomenal. Such a plethora of research available, so many historical variances you never knew about, and so on. It's fantastic, it's a wonderful subject to delve into and learn about, not just because of being thrust into the subject matter, but because it truly is a rich, amazing area to research. I understand your concerns with sourcing from physical books, particularly for people who will just dismiss it, it's an exercise in frustration, because the facts and the research is there, it's just going to fall on the ears of someone who doesn't want to hear it.

 

[Scarlet Rose]

I love and respect your passion for anthropology and, of course, gender. I got a little bit of a first hand crash course and the role of gender in society, but I have done my best to educate myself beyond that, as well, and what you learn when you really do your research is just phenomenal. Such a plethora of research available, so many historical variances you never knew about, and so on. It's fantastic, it's a wonderful subject to delve into and learn about, not just because of being thrust into the subject matter, but because it truly is a rich, amazing area to research. I understand your concerns with sourcing from physical books, particularly for people who will just dismiss it, it's an exercise in frustration, because the facts and the research is there, it's just going to fall on the ears of someone who doesn't want to hear it.

Gender really does touch on so many of the important debates and discussions within anthropology concerning the relationship between the sociocultural and the biological. It is such a complicated and nuanced relationship. For instance it was an online friend who highlighted to me a few years ago the gendered nature of organ donations. I had been completely oblivious to how most of the organ donations are done by women here in New Zealand. I would definitely be curious about memorable things you have read on it though! And when I get time I will look at trying to read it too!

 

[PGen98]

Gender really does touch on so many of the important debates and discussions within anthropology concerning the relationship between the sociocultural and the biological. It is such a complicated and nuanced relationship. For instance it was an online friend who highlighted to me a few years ago the gendered nature of organ donations. I had been completely oblivious to how most of the organ donations are done by women here in New Zealand. I would definitely be curious about memorable things you have read on it though! And when I get time I will look at trying to read it too!

I've read a lot of books that a friend loaned me, she's similarly very, very fascinated by the role of gender in society and the the role gender has played throughout history. I'll have to ask her some of the names of the books she loaned me, because I've totally forgotten, lol. I mentioned the fa'afafine, and their counterparts the fa'afatamas of polynesian culture (Samoa, specifically). The role they play in society there is truly fascinating! Able to blur the boundaries of gender, hold discussions on sex because men and women can't, and while there is some descrepancies about how valid this may be, it was rumoured in the old days that families with all or mostly male children would elect to raise one as a fa'afafine to fill a necessary role in the household,. That alone has been something so, so incredible to read about, and how truly accepted fa'afafine and fa'afatamas are in that culture, versus what trans people in the wider world face.

One of the funnier points about history and gender actually came from Frances de la Tour in The History Boys:

 

[Scarlet Rose]

I've read a lot of books that a friend loaned me, she's similarly very, very fascinated by the role of gender in society and the the role gender has played throughout history. I'll have to ask her some of the names of the books she loaned me, because I've totally forgotten, lol. I mentioned the fa'afafine, and their counterparts the fa'afatamas of polynesian culture (Samoa, specifically). The role they play in society there is truly fascinating! Able to blur the boundaries of gender, hold discussions on sex because men and women can't, and while there is some descrepancies about how valid this may be, it was rumoured in the old days that families with all or mostly male children would elect to raise one as a fa'afafine to fill a necessary role in the household,. That alone has been something so, so incredible to read about, and how truly accepted fa'afafine and fa'afatamas are in that culture, versus what trans people in the wider world face.

One of the funnier points about history and gender actually came from Frances de la Tour in The History Boys:

That is totally understandable. I am in a similar situation where a lot of the material I have come across and read on the cross cultural and historical variance of gender, I read it quite a while ago. The Lancaster book for instance I read back in 2009. A lot of the others were in 2011/12. So it is definitely easy to forget some of the specifics and details. It is why my references to them within this thread have been less particular on the details. Like there have been cultures where gender was tied to wealth and through the accruement of wealth and prestige a women could become a man. Or the culture where gender is split into subcategories along two paths where age played a role in determining your gender. A you woman being a different gender to an elderly woman for instance. The Samoan example is also correct and fitting since Samoa was one of the first places in the world that anthropologists studied to look at the relationship between nature and nurture when it comes to sex. On the grounds of which came the need to separate the cultural from the biological analysis. There have also been more complicating factors in the discussion, which have tied my hands at other points. Some of the shorthand terms used to refer to the phenomena are racist and rooted in imperialism so I have been reluctant to use them. Anthropology was, unfortunately, the handmaiden to colonialism. But lots of Native American societies had more fluid understandings of gender. Even sex itself isn't removed from sociocultural context, because the way we understand our bodies is informed by sociocultural factors too.

Edit: The video was amusing

 

[PGen98]

That is totally understandable. I am in a similar situation where a lot of the material I have come across and read on the cross cultural and historical variance of gender, I read it quite a while ago. The Lancaster book for instance I read back in 2009. A lot of the others were in 2011/12. So it is definitely easy to forget some of the specifics and details. It is why my references to them within this thread have been less particular on the details. Like there have been cultures where gender was tied to wealth and through the accruement of wealth and prestige a women could become a man. Or the culture where gender is split into subcategories along two paths where age played a role in determining your gender. A you woman being a different gender to an elderly woman for instance. The Samoan example is also correct and fitting since Samoa was one of the first places in the world that anthropologists studied to look at the relationship between nature and nurture when it comes to sex. On the grounds of which came the need to separate the cultural from the biological analysis. There have also been more complicating factors in the discussion, which have tied my hands at other points. Some of the shorthand terms used to refer to the phenomena are racist and rooted in imperialism so I have been reluctant to use them. Anthropology was, unfortunately, the handmaiden to colonialism. But lots of Native American societies had more fluid understandings of gender. Even sex itself isn't removed from sociocultural context, because the way we understand our bodies is informed by sociocultural factors too.

Edit: The video was amusing

Absolutely, I can remember reading about several cultures, some of them Native American, that had multiple different gender variations. The Samoan reference has four genders still recognized to this day, and there are so many other cultures that are or were similar. To close your mind to the concept of biological/genital sex versus gender and variances within is to exclude thousands of years of cultures outside of westernized cultures where gender is so, so much more than just what's between your legs or what chromosome you wound up with as a fetus. It's such a shame people close themselves off to that particular definition and stubbornly assert there is no such thing as variance when there so clearly is. They're missing so much in terms of perspective, granted, those people aren't genuinely interested in the topic, anyway, they just want to besmirch and belittle it because that's the thing to do at the moment. No matter how off-base they are.

I love Frances de la Tour, and that film in particular is well worth a watch! Her quotes on gender are hilariously (and depressingly) true!

 

[Webster]

So you consider this normal and sane?

Its' a loaded question demanding a response which I'm simply not going to give you because its' not worth wasting any breath over to give.

 

[Scarlet Rose]

Absolutely, I can remember reading about several cultures, some of them Native American, that had multiple different gender variations. The Samoan reference has four genders still recognized to this day, and there are so many other cultures that are or were similar. To close your mind to the concept of biological/genital sex versus gender and variances within is to exclude thousands of years of cultures outside of westernized cultures where gender is so, so much more than just what's between your legs or what chromosome you wound up with as a fetus. It's such a shame people close themselves off to that particular definition and stubbornly assert there is no such thing as variance when there so clearly is. They're missing so much in terms of perspective, granted, those people aren't genuinely interested in the topic, anyway, they just want to besmirch and belittle it because that's the thing to do at the moment. No matter how off-base they are.

I love Frances de la Tour, and that film in particular is well worth a watch! Her quotes on gender are hilariously (and depressingly) true!

Even the cultures which do only have two genders show a lot of variance and diversity in how they perceive and experience them. Not surprising since gender has referents with so many other points within a society, People have shown quite a variety in how they organize the sociocultural and this shows in gender. Also I found the example on age and gender. It is a wider point which speaks to what can be refered to as an age-graded society. Obviously even within this category there will be variance but when speaking of the Maasai of Kenya, anthropologist Melissa Llewelyn-Davies wrote

Maasai is an age-graded society and the social construction of gender cannot be considered in isolation from the social construction of age. Indeed, I hope to make it clear that the "age organization," as it is generally known in the literature on the Maasai and other East African societies, should more properly be called the "age/gender organization." It not only defines relations between members of the same sex on the basis of formal age status but also relations between the sexes. Relations with women are important in the age hierarchization of men. Moreover it is within the workings of the age/gender organization that notions of "male" and "female" are primarily constructed.

True, that, there can definitely be a lack of intellectual curiosity. The whole thing about people being more prepared to accept a simple falsehood over a complex truth. It is almost impressive though that within the literature those who present a biological determinist view were already arguing in an unconvincing and uncompelling way. But apparently it is possible to argue without even reaching their level of intellectual integrity. They at least attempt to engage with the literature on some level and provide some form of theoretical grounding for their views. Even if said grounding is incredibly at odds with the variance and diversity observed. Never thought I would miss the days of arguing with evolutionary psychologists and sociobiologists over gender.

 

[PGen98]

Even the cultures which do only have two genders show a lot of variance and diversity in how they perceive and experience them. Not surprising since gender has referents with so many other points within a society, People have shown quite a variety in how they organize the sociocultural and this shows in gender. Also I found the example on age and gender. It is a wider point which speaks to what can be refered to as an age-graded society. Obviously even within this category there will be variance but when speaking of the Maasai of Kenya, anthropologist Melissa Llewelyn-Davies wrote

Absolutely 100% agreed, just because a culture has two genders doesn't mean there can't be variances within them, and the Maasai are a fantastic example of that. Biological sex plays just a minor role in their gender, and that's acceptable as that's their culture. It's staggering to think that we've become so closed off to the ideas of variance that we're now here, in this point in time, supposedly more enlightened than ever, and yet we're seeing bomb threats on children's hospitals because they engage in gender-affirming care, which is "wrong" to some people. Astounding how backwards we've become.

True, that, there can definitely be a lack of intellectual curiosity. The whole thing about people being more prepared to accept a simple falsehood over a complex truth. It is almost impressive though that within the literature those who present a biological determinist view were already arguing in an unconvincing and uncompelling way. But apparently it is possible to argue without even reaching their level of intellectual integrity. They at least attempt to engage with the literature on some level and provide some form of theoretical grounding for their views. Even if said grounding is incredibly at odds with the variance and diversity observed. Never thought I would miss the days of arguing with evolutionary psychologists and sociobiologists over gender.

When it's an issue like this one, where the evidence is clear as day, the opposition just loves to stomp their feet and throw a fit because they want their side to be right. It goes from fact exchanging intellectual debate to whomever shouts loudest wins in their mind, very quickly!