5 ms·

It is mostly males that become transgender women – female transitions to male are extremely rare... From that point on, his work belongs to the woman’s family,

It is mostly males that become transgender women – female transitions to male are extremely rare... From that point on, his work belongs to the woman’s family, and it’s the woman who decides whether her husband can share his fish, coconuts or plantains with his own parents or siblings. Taken together, these two observations make a lot of sense. In a closed society where women have consolidated power like that, why would anyone become a man?

xj9 8y ago
if i'm not mistaken, MTF is more common that FTM in the general population, so it might not be tied to culture.
- recraft 8y ago
  This is patently false[0]. (This is the largest population I could find) The reason it looks this way is because Western culture has systemic oppositional sexism and views female gender roles as performative and artificial (the way our culture expects women to always be wearing makeup being one of many examples), subsequently trans women are far more salacious of a topic to the general public, whereas trans men are erased because our culture sees them as trying to pull themselves up by their bootstraps from a position of inferiority to a position of power. (That must be it right?!?) If you’re interested I’d highly recommend the book “Whipping Girl” by Julia Serano. [0]http://gids.nhs.uk/number-referrals http://gids.nhs.uk/number-referrals
  - toasterlovin 8y ago
    It would be interesting to know what the actual transition numbers are, though. These are just referrals.
    - recraft 8y ago
      Page 44[0] documents a survey of trans people in the USA in 2015, with 31% identifying as trans men and 32% identifying as trans women (and 31% identifying as non-binary). (this is the most comprehensive document I've found on the topic thus far) [0] https://transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/usts/USTS-Full-Report-Dec17.pdf https://transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/usts/USTS...
  - another-cuppa 8y ago
    That shows "referrals" of teenagers. Doesn't really mean anything about what actually happens. All teenagers are weird for a little while. It's great if you stay weird, but most don't.
cpsempek 8y ago
I agree, gender could be a red herring here. Power structures could better explain the social behavior. However, I would like to understand the differences, if any, between patriarchal and matriarchal societies. Anyone has a suggestions for resources in this regard?
- solidsnack9000 8y ago
  There doesn't seem to be such a thing as a matriarchal society -- where women hold the major political offices. The closest thing is a matrilocal society.
- solidsnack9000 8y ago
  The "Standard Cross Cultural Sample" is a large collection of data about ~180 societies across the world. The list of variables covered, broken down into categories, includes several related gender and division of labor: http://eclectic.ss.uci.edu/~drwhite/courses/stdsvars.html http://eclectic.ss.uci.edu/~drwhite/courses/stdsvars.html There is a website for browsing the data. Looks a little challenging to use: http://socscicompute.ss.uci.edu/ http://socscicompute.ss.uci.edu/ After describing some of the early research and theorizing about matriarchies, the Encyclpaedia Britannica states: "The consensus among modern anthropologists and sociologists is that while many cultures bestow power preferentially on one sex or the other, matriarchal societies in this original, evolutionary sense have never existed."
bryanlarsen 8y ago
The article explicitly states that the society is not a matriarchy; all the chiefs etc are men. Japan is generally viewed as a heavily patriarchal society, yet has similar customs. For example, a typical couple's bank account is controlled by the wife.
- belorn 8y ago
  What power do the chiefs actually have? The article says that all domestic decisions are made by women, and there is no hierarchy. Sound like "politicians and chiefs" are western interpretation of what could possible simply be a figure head or a diplomatic position to do trading with other islands.
  - rsynnott 8y ago
    It’s perfectly possible for women to have a lot of control over society, especially over domestic society, without that society being matriarchal. For instance, Brehon Law gave women rights which were unusual versus other western contemporaries, especially in terms of property, but no-one considers early Medieval Ireland to be matriarchal.
    - belorn 8y ago
      Everything is possible but the question remain, what power do chiefs and politicians have in that society? It doesn't seem quite that unreasonable question to ask.
  - solidsnack9000 8y ago
    The power chieftains hold in these positions is usually: * Organising and directing the hunters, and dividing their kill. * The power to declare war, and to divide the spoils. * Powers relating to treaties and trade with other tribes. * Adjudicating disputes between families. The chief and his retinue are often the only recognisable political offices in such societies, in the sense that: * There is an open and explicit process for selecting the office holder. * Everyone openly acknowledges their authority. * They make open proclamations with regards to their rules and determinations. * They are held accountable for their decisions and their outcomes. They constitute the public, universal aspect of power — formal authority. This is not the only kind of power possible. As an earlier poster notes, in most East Asian societies from time immemorial women held the purse strings. Many societies are organised in such a way, that women have great power in aggregate but men hold the official, political positions. Susan Carol Rogers’ “The Myth of Male Dominance: Female Forms of Power” explores this dynamic in French peasant society. Patriarchy and women being in practice more powerful can co-exist. There are virtually (actually?) no matriarchies in history or on the earth today, in the sense that women hold the majority of positions where power is open, accountable and governed by law (or custom). In most historical societies, women held none of these positions. That doesn’t mean they just rolled over and played dead while men ran riot with the power. Perhaps as modernity got underway, the official power of men became much more significant. It wasn’t always the case that getting a new road in your town required approval at the state/province level. Informal, local power receded from view and it was only reasonable that women sought the formal, political kind in modernising societies. This change also makes it hard for us to recognise the importance of informal power in simpler societies.

xj9 8y ago

if i'm not mistaken, MTF is more common that FTM in the general population, so it might not be tied to culture.

recraft 8y ago
This is patently false[0]. (This is the largest population I could find) The reason it looks this way is because Western culture has systemic oppositional sexism and views female gender roles as performative and artificial (the way our culture expects women to always be wearing makeup being one of many examples), subsequently trans women are far more salacious of a topic to the general public, whereas trans men are erased because our culture sees them as trying to pull themselves up by their bootstraps from a position of inferiority to a position of power. (That must be it right?!?) If you’re interested I’d highly recommend the book “Whipping Girl” by Julia Serano. [0]http://gids.nhs.uk/number-referrals http://gids.nhs.uk/number-referrals
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  It would be interesting to know what the actual transition numbers are, though. These are just referrals.
  - recraft 8y ago
    Page 44[0] documents a survey of trans people in the USA in 2015, with 31% identifying as trans men and 32% identifying as trans women (and 31% identifying as non-binary). (this is the most comprehensive document I've found on the topic thus far) [0] https://transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/usts/USTS-Full-Report-Dec17.pdf https://transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/usts/USTS...
- another-cuppa 8y ago
  That shows "referrals" of teenagers. Doesn't really mean anything about what actually happens. All teenagers are weird for a little while. It's great if you stay weird, but most don't.

cpsempek 8y ago

I agree, gender could be a red herring here. Power structures could better explain the social behavior. However, I would like to understand the differences, if any, between patriarchal and matriarchal societies. Anyone has a suggestions for resources in this regard?

solidsnack9000 8y ago
There doesn't seem to be such a thing as a matriarchal society -- where women hold the major political offices. The closest thing is a matrilocal society.
solidsnack9000 8y ago
The "Standard Cross Cultural Sample" is a large collection of data about ~180 societies across the world. The list of variables covered, broken down into categories, includes several related gender and division of labor: http://eclectic.ss.uci.edu/~drwhite/courses/stdsvars.html http://eclectic.ss.uci.edu/~drwhite/courses/stdsvars.html There is a website for browsing the data. Looks a little challenging to use: http://socscicompute.ss.uci.edu/ http://socscicompute.ss.uci.edu/ After describing some of the early research and theorizing about matriarchies, the Encyclpaedia Britannica states: "The consensus among modern anthropologists and sociologists is that while many cultures bestow power preferentially on one sex or the other, matriarchal societies in this original, evolutionary sense have never existed."

bryanlarsen 8y ago

The article explicitly states that the society is not a matriarchy; all the chiefs etc are men. Japan is generally viewed as a heavily patriarchal society, yet has similar customs. For example, a typical couple's bank account is controlled by the wife.

belorn 8y ago
What power do the chiefs actually have? The article says that all domestic decisions are made by women, and there is no hierarchy. Sound like "politicians and chiefs" are western interpretation of what could possible simply be a figure head or a diplomatic position to do trading with other islands.
- rsynnott 8y ago
  It’s perfectly possible for women to have a lot of control over society, especially over domestic society, without that society being matriarchal. For instance, Brehon Law gave women rights which were unusual versus other western contemporaries, especially in terms of property, but no-one considers early Medieval Ireland to be matriarchal.
  - belorn 8y ago
    Everything is possible but the question remain, what power do chiefs and politicians have in that society? It doesn't seem quite that unreasonable question to ask.
- solidsnack9000 8y ago
  The power chieftains hold in these positions is usually: * Organising and directing the hunters, and dividing their kill. * The power to declare war, and to divide the spoils. * Powers relating to treaties and trade with other tribes. * Adjudicating disputes between families. The chief and his retinue are often the only recognisable political offices in such societies, in the sense that: * There is an open and explicit process for selecting the office holder. * Everyone openly acknowledges their authority. * They make open proclamations with regards to their rules and determinations. * They are held accountable for their decisions and their outcomes. They constitute the public, universal aspect of power — formal authority. This is not the only kind of power possible. As an earlier poster notes, in most East Asian societies from time immemorial women held the purse strings. Many societies are organised in such a way, that women have great power in aggregate but men hold the official, political positions. Susan Carol Rogers’ “The Myth of Male Dominance: Female Forms of Power” explores this dynamic in French peasant society. Patriarchy and women being in practice more powerful can co-exist. There are virtually (actually?) no matriarchies in history or on the earth today, in the sense that women hold the majority of positions where power is open, accountable and governed by law (or custom). In most historical societies, women held none of these positions. That doesn’t mean they just rolled over and played dead while men ran riot with the power. Perhaps as modernity got underway, the official power of men became much more significant. It wasn’t always the case that getting a new road in your town required approval at the state/province level. Informal, local power receded from view and it was only reasonable that women sought the formal, political kind in modernising societies. This change also makes it hard for us to recognise the importance of informal power in simpler societies.