|
Post by Alex on Mar 28, 2010 19:45:12 GMT -5
This thread is for a discussion on gender identity. The pros and cons of reclaiming your gender, or identifying with a different gender than your body type, or not identifying with any gender at all. Does any of it matter in the end? Are we doing anything to smash the gender roles that are forcced onto us from birth?
|
|
|
Post by dellicious on Mar 28, 2010 19:55:52 GMT -5
female is a perfectly fine way to identify one's self, as is male and a million other things. the point of contemporary gender theory is not to eliminate gender (i.e. physical expresssion, sense of self, the sexual body, etc), but to open gender up to the wide variety of persynal identifications and experiences. basically, this recognizes that there are as many genders as there are people, and if some people find similarities between their gender identities and those of others, then why not identify with them (don't we all identify as a part of some community/category/scene/whatever?). and to me, this amounts to a total deconstruction (destruction?) of what gender and sex mean, effectively challenging gender essentialism, patriarchy, heterosexism, and cis-normativity. i obviously don't want a world where one aspect of one's body determines so much, but i also find no problem with people of similar experience/expression of self/etc finding commonality within a world where gender is both fluid and persynally determined. This whole passage seems like a terrible contradiction. It makes sense that there shouldn't be limitations to what a person feels, or labels prescribed by society to confine a person within those limitations. But if you want gender to have indeterminate definitions, then why not eliminate it all together? If there needs to be as many variations of it as there are people, then it isn't a "community/category/scene/whatever." It is a singular expression, not a collated one. what is it that wolfi says in one piece - he doesn't want to make the world one androgynous group, but to open up the possibilities of expresssion? makes sense to me. I think to use an idea of Wolfi to back your statement is ill-fitting. If you are clinging to any one identity (female, male, transgender) you are not deconstructing the term, but instead defining it by it's members. Wolfi wants to dismiss the idea of binary gender, but you seem to want to create a million more distinct and disconnected forms of gender. What I'm trying to say is, what difference does it make if there are only two acknowledged forms, or infinite? People will still feel pressure from one source or another to assume the form of that gender.
|
|
|
Post by dellicious on Mar 28, 2010 20:08:38 GMT -5
i'm sorry if i made a generalized assumption about your experience. that's why i used "if", but i understand if that was still lame. the thing is, you not only made generalized assumptions about others' experiences, you insulted them as needing "a crutch or a goddamn safe space" and i don't think that's okay. i do, and others do, continue to expect certain -- more respectful -- behaviors from people, and i am NOT let down every time. people CAN be nice. i think one way to legitimately stand up for myself is to call people out when they have a shitty attitude. yeah, this has gotten kinda silly and gone a little far -- thats what tends to happen on messageboards. i think its legitimate discussin and disputin. im thinking about things differently from what you said. nobody really wants to rehash the whole "need for a respectful space" thing. it is kind of a dead horse, not because it's irrelevant but because it shouldnt be a question anymore. I only spoke for myself as not needing a crutch or a safe place. Respect is such a mossback term, anyway. Arguments are messy and if you continue to take everything that is said as a blatant lash against you, you will sprout mature issues from minuscule words.
|
|
still a stranger
Posts: 74
|
Post by on Mar 28, 2010 20:18:15 GMT -5
I guess I missed the whole argument and I don't really intend on getting involved in it but here's my two cents on it.
Lately I identify as female, because I want what I am to be. I also am female bodied. For a while I got really used to saying I identified as "male" because I assumed that since I didn't fit conventional femininity norms or really relate to anybody else about gender that it must have somehow meant that I identified as male (which I don't agree with now, because that reinforces the idea that male is the default gender for things which are ungendered or atleast unspecified.) I don't really know what I think about what male and female even really are other than what people re/claim them as. My gender is as fluid as my sexuality but I didn't put male as the gender on the boards here to be subversive, I just didn't feel like putting female. I could have left it blank but I didn't, because while sometimes I identify as neither male nor female putting nothing doesn't really say that.
|
|
|
Post by xmackx on Mar 29, 2010 6:45:06 GMT -5
i think dellicious said a little less than what i would have said, but said it in a straightforward concise manner, and i think i'll leave it at that for now.
sambam, you don't want to take the time to read what other people have written and just want to say what you want to say? how is that even conversation? perhaps you don't want to have a conversation and only want to be heard? come on, really? "i don't want to get involved, but here is my two cents."
alex: i understand that you want the topic to "stay on topic" but by cutting it in half you're cutting out a lot of things from the other thread that contributed to the content of the conversation and effectively eliminating it. i kind of think this is a poor decision.
|
|
still a stranger
Posts: 74
|
Post by on Mar 29, 2010 10:12:43 GMT -5
yeah, i guess it's kinda selfish of me, but i wanted to post about it, but halfway through my post i realized there was a huge argument about it and i was like, what? i need to go read a million pages of stuff just so i can voice my opinion on something? i didn't know this thread was meant to be a continuation of it, haha
|
|
|
Post by xmackx on Mar 29, 2010 11:53:32 GMT -5
it really wasn't even that much reading, especially considering this is something you say you're interested in, and usually one of the few things you normally post about on the messageboard, whether it be in what books you're reading or whatever. anyway...
|
|
still a stranger
Posts: 74
|
Post by on Mar 29, 2010 12:19:32 GMT -5
yeah yeah yeah, jer!
|
|
arjay
still a stranger
Posts: 29
|
Post by arjay on Mar 29, 2010 12:44:23 GMT -5
Communities will develop between like minded individuals, and then those individuals will attempt to grow into some ideal that is held up by that community as an example of what that community values. Whether that be a traditional ideal of beauty or some patched, pierced punk kid, every community has their ideal that acts on the individuals of that community. The important thing, in my mind, isn't to fight that tendency but to find a way to exist within a community with as little oppression acted upon you as possible and whenever possible help others do the same. Also, dellicious, it'd be really cool if you could stop being so insulting. I understand that arguments are messy sometimes but tone it down a little. Or don't, really it's up to you, I just figured no harm could come from asking.
|
|
|
Post by dellicious on Mar 29, 2010 19:47:20 GMT -5
alex: i understand that you want the topic to "stay on topic" but by cutting it in half you're cutting out a lot of things from the other thread that contributed to the content of the conversation and effectively eliminating it. i kind of think this is a poor decision. It also seems like this half was started without him reading the entirety of the argument, because the introduction doesn't really pertain to what was being said in the other thread. Bummer.
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Mar 29, 2010 20:43:12 GMT -5
as you've done already, feel free to quote people from the other thread and post your reply. sorry, i just didn't see the relevance of the discussion on sexism and gender with natural disasters and civilization. i felt like jay (roaring inside) responded to you about your arguments about the original topic, and you just ignored it to defend yourself when wolf called you sexist, and it sprung a completely different conversation. i think the same discussion that was happening on the last page of the other thread CAN continue in THIS thread...
|
|
|
Post by xmackx on Mar 29, 2010 22:36:44 GMT -5
as you've done already, feel free to quote people from the other thread and post your reply. sorry, i just didn't see the relevance of the discussion on sexism and gender with natural disasters and civilization. i felt like jay (roaring inside) responded to you about your arguments about the original topic, and you just ignored it to defend yourself when wolf called you sexist, and it sprung a completely different conversation. i think the same discussion that was happening on the last page of the other thread CAN continue in THIS thread... sure, i guess it CAN continue in this thread, but it lacks where it came from. i feel like you make it easier for people to ignore the progress of the discussion because you split it, and people are lazy as it is and don't take the time to read back to contribute something even worthwhile (won't name any names) and this does nothing but help and even justify that laziness all in the name of keeping a completely dead topic (natural disasters) clean. it could have happened there all the same. nobody was even talking about that any more, and i think something decent was being talked about---better than natural disasters, anyway.
|
|
|
Post by wolf on Mar 30, 2010 12:04:09 GMT -5
I don't think this is too big of a deal. Seems like we're getting sidetracked again. People can see where the discussion came from by looking at this thread: ryfrecords.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=discuss&action=display&thread=325Back to talking about Gender though. I think what arjay said above is pretty interesting. I guess I would like to say that it's possible, and desirable, to achieve a community where there is no ideal body image held up by the members of that community. Where individuality is embraced in all aspects. However, having said that, I myself haven't ever seen a community like this (though I wish I had), so I can't argue that it is indeed possible. Maybe ideals are part of our nature, I don't know. Maybe they're not.
|
|
|
Post by tOM on Apr 17, 2010 13:20:42 GMT -5
mikearthur you're easier than mikey, boom roasted.
|
|
arjay
still a stranger
Posts: 29
|
Post by arjay on Apr 18, 2010 12:24:39 GMT -5
I don't understand Boom roasted. Should I be afraid of this thing?
|
|