Thanks. There’s a lot of bad faith replies here; I appreciate the honest engagement. I get the feeling that we’re heading into circular logic territory if we were to discuss what it means to be “masculine” or “feminine” in a gender-fluid, sex-abstracted context. It’d be best if we leave it here, as much as it pains me to stifle my own curiosity.
They inform each other through culture, but they are not the same thing. Just like female lions do most of the hunting. To them, hunting might end up a feminine trait.
Centuries ago, it was expected for women to wear pants, now, not so much. In the Victorian era, men wore makeup too. The social expectations that inform gender change drastically. To be gender non-conforming can mean very different things in different societies. For example; David Bowie. In the Victorian era, he’d have barely stood out at all, besides his talents.
Sex is about the physical body, and gender is about self-identification. Social norms inform what attributes are attributed to what, but it is seldom (virtually never) anything set in stone.
On top of that, the more rigid society tries to be, the more room there is to be “different” and for people to not feel included by those rigid expectations. So the hilarious irony is, conservative shitheads trying to make everyone conform does the exact opposite of what they want; It creates more dejected and excluded people, who are then more likely to be anything but “normal”.
Of course.
Gender is a spectrum between feminine and masculine. It is determined by society and can change depending on when and where you live.
For example, a skirt is seen as something feminine. But go to Scotland and there it is something masculine instead.
Thanks. There’s a lot of bad faith replies here; I appreciate the honest engagement. I get the feeling that we’re heading into circular logic territory if we were to discuss what it means to be “masculine” or “feminine” in a gender-fluid, sex-abstracted context. It’d be best if we leave it here, as much as it pains me to stifle my own curiosity.
They inform each other through culture, but they are not the same thing. Just like female lions do most of the hunting. To them, hunting might end up a feminine trait.
Centuries ago, it was expected for women to wear pants, now, not so much. In the Victorian era, men wore makeup too. The social expectations that inform gender change drastically. To be gender non-conforming can mean very different things in different societies. For example; David Bowie. In the Victorian era, he’d have barely stood out at all, besides his talents.
Sex is about the physical body, and gender is about self-identification. Social norms inform what attributes are attributed to what, but it is seldom (virtually never) anything set in stone.
On top of that, the more rigid society tries to be, the more room there is to be “different” and for people to not feel included by those rigid expectations. So the hilarious irony is, conservative shitheads trying to make everyone conform does the exact opposite of what they want; It creates more dejected and excluded people, who are then more likely to be anything but “normal”.