5 ms·

Surgery helps with romantic relationships and also with "passing" as the target gender. If everyone in society treats you as Gender X when you want to be Gende

by smt88 4y ago

Surgery helps with romantic relationships and also with "passing" as the target gender. If everyone in society treats you as Gender X when you want to be Gender Y, then you're effectively just Gender X still (again, because gender is a social concept).

239847823971 4y ago
The ironic thing is that in modern society, I feel like we should not treat people of differently based on sex/gender. The only time it really crosses my mind as a male, is that if there is a violent altercation or self-defense situation, you should never strike a female, and you should try to protect a female if they can't defend themselves. But this is generally because they are probably physcially weaker...unless they are an MMA fighter or something. Especially in the workplace, and especially when working on the internet. It would be wrong to treat someone differently based on sex/gender. Which is why all the gender pronoun insistence is a bit strange. The only other time is to do with romantic relationships or sexual interest. An interesting question is what about women interests men, and is it environmental vs innate? I think its clear that innately men are interested in roughly the same physical characteristics of women. But for the societal adjectives/behaviours used to describe "femininity"...are these innate to females? Or do women simply fit the stereotypes that were universally desireable for men innately? Or are these feminine stereotypes (or male's female behavioural preferences) a relic passed down from past societies. As a hetero male, it's interesting to think about why you are interested in women. Your first girlfriend, why were you interested in her. And before you were even old enough to be interested in sex. For me, if I recall it was extremely innate. The shape of their face, the sound of their voice, that kind of thing. Nothing sexual initially. And not really any distinctively feminine behaviour. You do also have societal things like females dressed in a certain way and had long hair, but these don't appear significant to me. Therefore, I would argue that for most people there is a very strong inate preference for physical characteristics that match the opposite sex - which makes sense evolutionarily. Most people are strictly interested in the opposite sex. I think there is also a repulsion against sexual interest from the same sex (which probably explains a lot of bigotry too). I don't think a lot of people have experienced this, and I'm not sure if its cultural either, but I do posit that if it exists, then its a big men discriminated against homosexuals, or even the reason why it was entered into religious texts which may have just reflected the instinctual feelings of ancient societies without an understanding of the harm this would cause. So back to my original line of thought. If someone is asking me to treat a trans-female as a female, nothing in my behaviour will actually change nor should it. And the only time it should as I said earlier, as in a physical altercation, the physically inferior rules no longer apply. So it begs the question of what this societal recognition actually is? For sexual interest, humans are extremely sensitive to even minor physical attributes, so that most of the time they will be able to tell the birth sex. But in the cases where they cannot tell the difference...is this actually the ultimate recognition that trans people persue? I think it's this scenario that may cause a lot of bigotry too, because I think people may feel they are tricked into a homosexual desire, and if they have an innate repulsion to such feelings, then you could understand it triggering an emotional response. But a big question is whether this is "innate" or whether its societal which I will admit it very much may be - in the sense that being gay was traditionally viewed as a weakeness and not fitting desired masculine characteristics that determine hierarchy and power in male friend groups, and also self-esteem. In terms of genatalia though, I think humans are even more particular, and so even if a trans female was able to look like a female at a distance, and feel like a female on closer examination, a sexual relationship with a hetero male is probably still very rare. But then you have to appreciate that two heteros matching is still not a given.
Vt71fcAqt7 4y ago
I tried to phrase my question such that you would answer the more difficult first question, which is a necessary prerequisite for the answer to the second question having any meaning. That is, what is the gender of man and how is it different from the gender of woman?
- smt88 4y ago
  I didn't answer that question because you know the answer already, and your question was either rhetorical or just ignoring the concept of "gender" as it is used in modern anthropology. In most societies, the differences include: - clothing/hair/jewelry - job expectations (easier for men to be truck drivers, easier for women to be babysitters, etc.) - division of chores in a household - pronouns - certain rights, especially related to marriage and parenthood I know that you know this because you live in a society and can (most of the time) guess someone's gender by their appearance. None of these divisions are necessarily good. They're just what society enforces.
  - Vt71fcAqt7 4y ago
    These were all supposed to be things that we're getting rid of. Now, not only are we not getting rid of it, we are going to celebrate it, and consider those who do things stereotyped by one sex as in the same gender as that sex? For example, we will accept that a male is a woman because they like cleaning? Not to mention that there exist people who do these thing and do not consider themselves the other gender. For example you will find that most women at sports events do not identify as men. >None of these divisions are necessarily good Why do you say that these divisions are "necessarily" good? Are they not downright bad? Either there is a vast, innate emotional difference between men and women, so much so that it makes sense to classify them as different genders, and on the more rare case where one person does not fit into that gender they change it, or there is not a vast difference between genders, and we should work to elliminate "what society enforces" on that sex, rather than try to keep these two arbritary lines and make cleary misleading claims such as that they are really born as men/women ect. Rather than suppose dozens of genders with a "man" gender dominated by males and a "woman" gender dominated by females, which is itslef on a broad spectrum, some of which is forced and some of which is not, yes, we should not accept this insane idea of gender. Instead of trying to put children on hormone blockers we should just let them exist naturaly instead of like some sort of farm animal, castrated and souped up on hormones to fit in with what some deragned gender anothropologist says.

by smt88 4y ago

239847823971 4y ago

The ironic thing is that in modern society, I feel like we should not treat people of differently based on sex/gender. The only time it really crosses my mind as a male, is that if there is a violent altercation or self-defense situation, you should never strike a female, and you should try to protect a female if they can't defend themselves. But this is generally because they are probably physcially weaker...unless they are an MMA fighter or something. Especially in the workplace, and especially when working on the internet. It would be wrong to treat someone differently based on sex/gender. Which is why all the gender pronoun insistence is a bit strange. The only other time is to do with romantic relationships or sexual interest. An interesting question is what about women interests men, and is it environmental vs innate? I think its clear that innately men are interested in roughly the same physical characteristics of women. But for the societal adjectives/behaviours used to describe "femininity"...are these innate to females? Or do women simply fit the stereotypes that were universally desireable for men innately? Or are these feminine stereotypes (or male's female behavioural preferences) a relic passed down from past societies. As a hetero male, it's interesting to think about why you are interested in women. Your first girlfriend, why were you interested in her. And before you were even old enough to be interested in sex. For me, if I recall it was extremely innate. The shape of their face, the sound of their voice, that kind of thing. Nothing sexual initially. And not really any distinctively feminine behaviour. You do also have societal things like females dressed in a certain way and had long hair, but these don't appear significant to me. Therefore, I would argue that for most people there is a very strong inate preference for physical characteristics that match the opposite sex - which makes sense evolutionarily. Most people are strictly interested in the opposite sex. I think there is also a repulsion against sexual interest from the same sex (which probably explains a lot of bigotry too). I don't think a lot of people have experienced this, and I'm not sure if its cultural either, but I do posit that if it exists, then its a big men discriminated against homosexuals, or even the reason why it was entered into religious texts which may have just reflected the instinctual feelings of ancient societies without an understanding of the harm this would cause. So back to my original line of thought. If someone is asking me to treat a trans-female as a female, nothing in my behaviour will actually change nor should it. And the only time it should as I said earlier, as in a physical altercation, the physically inferior rules no longer apply. So it begs the question of what this societal recognition actually is? For sexual interest, humans are extremely sensitive to even minor physical attributes, so that most of the time they will be able to tell the birth sex. But in the cases where they cannot tell the difference...is this actually the ultimate recognition that trans people persue? I think it's this scenario that may cause a lot of bigotry too, because I think people may feel they are tricked into a homosexual desire, and if they have an innate repulsion to such feelings, then you could understand it triggering an emotional response. But a big question is whether this is "innate" or whether its societal which I will admit it very much may be - in the sense that being gay was traditionally viewed as a weakeness and not fitting desired masculine characteristics that determine hierarchy and power in male friend groups, and also self-esteem. In terms of genatalia though, I think humans are even more particular, and so even if a trans female was able to look like a female at a distance, and feel like a female on closer examination, a sexual relationship with a hetero male is probably still very rare. But then you have to appreciate that two heteros matching is still not a given.

Vt71fcAqt7 4y ago

I tried to phrase my question such that you would answer the more difficult first question, which is a necessary prerequisite for the answer to the second question having any meaning. That is, what is the gender of man and how is it different from the gender of woman?

smt88 4y ago
I didn't answer that question because you know the answer already, and your question was either rhetorical or just ignoring the concept of "gender" as it is used in modern anthropology. In most societies, the differences include: - clothing/hair/jewelry - job expectations (easier for men to be truck drivers, easier for women to be babysitters, etc.) - division of chores in a household - pronouns - certain rights, especially related to marriage and parenthood I know that you know this because you live in a society and can (most of the time) guess someone's gender by their appearance. None of these divisions are necessarily good. They're just what society enforces.
- Vt71fcAqt7 4y ago
  These were all supposed to be things that we're getting rid of. Now, not only are we not getting rid of it, we are going to celebrate it, and consider those who do things stereotyped by one sex as in the same gender as that sex? For example, we will accept that a male is a woman because they like cleaning? Not to mention that there exist people who do these thing and do not consider themselves the other gender. For example you will find that most women at sports events do not identify as men. >None of these divisions are necessarily good Why do you say that these divisions are "necessarily" good? Are they not downright bad? Either there is a vast, innate emotional difference between men and women, so much so that it makes sense to classify them as different genders, and on the more rare case where one person does not fit into that gender they change it, or there is not a vast difference between genders, and we should work to elliminate "what society enforces" on that sex, rather than try to keep these two arbritary lines and make cleary misleading claims such as that they are really born as men/women ect. Rather than suppose dozens of genders with a "man" gender dominated by males and a "woman" gender dominated by females, which is itslef on a broad spectrum, some of which is forced and some of which is not, yes, we should not accept this insane idea of gender. Instead of trying to put children on hormone blockers we should just let them exist naturaly instead of like some sort of farm animal, castrated and souped up on hormones to fit in with what some deragned gender anothropologist says.