4 ms·
Assuming you are asking in good faith: Yes, I'm referring to several groups of people - trans men who were born women, intersex people who may have been assign
by socialismisok 4y ago
Assuming you are asking in good faith:
Yes, I'm referring to several groups of people - trans men who were born women, intersex people who may have been assigned man or woman, non-binary/queer/agender people who were born with a functional uterus.
All three of those groups might not be women. They may identify as female, but not women. Or they may not identify as female.
Language is evolving and not settled at all, but there's a movement to separate the concepts of "man" and "male". For example, we can probably agree that Bruce Willis is manlier than PeeWee Herman. But they are both male. Manliness, how much a "man" someone is, is a huge spectrum and it's socially defined. Likewise, how "womanly" someone is is a spectrum, and also cultural.
By separating the concepts of man from male, and woman from female, we can discuss how womanly or manly someone is, and what our societies expect from the roles of women and men.
I find it useful. Others have strong aversions to even discussing the concept. I'm happy to answer further questions!
- SoftTalker 4y ago> Manliness, how much a "man" someone is, is a huge spectrum and it's socially defined. Likewise, how "womanly" someone is is a spectrum, and also cultural. This doesn't seem to be anything new. Go back 100 years, or more, there were manly women and effeminate men.
- n4r9 4y agoIt's not at all new. Many Native American cultural traditions had a sophisticated gender fluidity: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2010/oct/11/two-spirit-people-north-america https://www.theguardian.com/music/2010/oct/11/two-spirit-peo... In many ways the gender rigidity of late 20th century western society is an exception in human history.
- lostlogin 4y agoThank you.
- skydhash 4y agoI was reading a science-fiction book [0], where they refer to the biological sex as being a manform or a womanform, but the personal articles are the indication of the person gender, either man, woman, or neutral. My own native language is genderless, so unless you precise the sex or other biological attributes, there's no way to determine if you're speaking of a male or a female. [0]: The Machineries of Empire series
- klipt 4y ago> For example, we can probably agree that Bruce Willis is manlier than PeeWee Herman. So now we're policing people's gender based on their habits? "If you wear pants you're not a REAL woman"?
- socialismisok 4y agoI've got some bad news about our culture, people regularly police each other based on clothing. I think it's a bad practice. If I want to wear a skirt and call myself a man or a woman wants to wear pants, who the fuck cares. (Traditionalists care, a lot, as it turns out.) I say let people decide what they want to wear and not make any assumptions about how to label them.
- MaxfordAndSons 4y ago> Or they may not identify as female. I thought the male/female dichotomy was the one meant to be separated from matters of identity, and simply be a biology based designation. I understand identifying as man or woman or neither is a self determined social designation; but how can someone claim that they are not female if they have two X chromosomes?
- yosame 4y agoBecause biology is far more complicated than the binary presence of an X or Y chromosome. The easiest way to explain this is that being intersex also exists in biology: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex_(biology) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex_(biology)
- socialismisok 4y agoSome folks who identify as women might not identify as female. This might be true even for cisgender women in rare cases. An infertile XY person may be born with female genitalia in rare cases, and be raised as a woman only to discover later in life they have the typically male chromosomes. These sets of people are small, but non zero. It's probably safe to say nearly all XX people identify as female.