I really don't understand how guys and girls interact with each other.
In my case I strictly talk to both sides in a manner of logic, comprehension, and reasoning. However when it comes to certain topics I am for the lack of better words dumbstruck in understanding why some people think certain ways.
But I guess what I'm really curious about is why is there so much misunderstanding between the genders? and why some people can't just let go of their ego, pride, or whatever it is to just talk to each other?
I think generalizing this as "guys" and "girls" is risky. I'm decidedly female, but fucked if I can understand why most of the women I know think the way they do. I tend to get along better with anyone who is honest and up front about their needs and feelings rather than being passive-aggressive and evasive - typically I find men to be more like this, but some women are too.
Communication between genders can have undertones and implications that cause reactive or illogical responses.
There's "Can I borrow your pencil?" and then there's "Can I borrow your pencil?" with the hope you'll <get naked|avoid confrontation|ask a favor|...> later. :P
well maybe it has something to do with the fact that the two genders think differently. Their thought processes are completely different... men think sequencially, and women think of all aspects of things, in a rounder sense if you will. that doesn't sound very convincing... i'm pretty bad at explaining things.
Oh, I can see this thread getting ugly...but I hope it doesn't.
Quote from: Glitch on March 22, 2010, 08:23:35 PM
Oh, I can see this thread getting ugly...but I hope it doesn't.
definitely. *waits for pyronikari*
Quote from: michiko nakano on March 22, 2010, 08:26:10 PM
Quote from: Glitch on March 22, 2010, 08:23:35 PM
Oh, I can see this thread getting ugly...but I hope it doesn't.
definitely. *waits for pyronikari*
You just jinxed it! *watches everything shake and rumble.*
Quote from: michiko nakano on March 22, 2010, 08:26:10 PM
Quote from: Glitch on March 22, 2010, 08:23:35 PM
Oh, I can see this thread getting ugly...but I hope it doesn't.
definitely. *waits for pyronikari*
who?
But anyways a part of my hypothesis is that it greatly depends on culture and up bringing of the individual. However from observations and interactions between the two genders, the relative idea and theoretical responses are generally the same most of the time depending on the subject.
But just like Tony stated why is there that reactive and/or illogical response?
in my knowledge, there are certain reactions to things that happen, and everyone has their own main reaction. however, *most* males tend to have reaction A, whereas *most* females tend to have reaction B... there are always the oddballs who have a different reaction than the normal one for their group... but then people have just automatically tacked reaction A onto males, and reaction B onto females, even though the reactions aren't really loyal to just one group. does that make sense?
Quote from: michiko nakano on March 23, 2010, 11:14:38 AM
in my knowledge, there are certain reactions to things that happen, and everyone has their own main reaction. however, *most* males tend to have reaction A, whereas *most* females tend to have reaction B... there are always the oddballs who have a different reaction than the normal one for their group... but then people have just automatically tacked reaction A onto males, and reaction B onto females, even though the reactions aren't really loyal to just one group. does that make sense?
Makes absolute sense. Just like everything else in genetics, there's always some variable. The complexity of humanity.
Its not all about sex. We each are very different and are made up of our upbringing and experiences. There is no way any of us are like any other, and because of that we all communicate differently. Some more than others. Look at the high school archetypes. I am sure the gamer boys and girls communicate much more effectively than with the jock or cheerleader.....
don't buy into that men from mars women venus stuff.
Also, look at how you communicate with different people, like a male classmate and a male friend and contrast that to your communications with a female classmate and female friend. You communicate differently with each of them because the communication is not just you, but the combined experience and culture of both of you.
It just can't be simplified into something as binary as sex.
Eric got it for the most part, but I'll add on.
Although there are themes between males and there are themes between females, for the most part it's bad stereotyping. People state the whole "Men and females are so different" thing is mostly from people that have no real understanding in general. They don't even get males, and have no luck with females(and vice versa) so they make it into an excuse about the gender. The usually themes, are mostly gender roles based on how they're raised and societal values that are instilled into them.
People themselves though, are unique. They like what they do, they think how they do, and that's how they are. It's not because they're male or female. Take a picture of any sports crowd, and although there are generally more males, there are quite a bit of females. Look at any well done poll about gamers, and again, although there are more males, there are still quite a lot of females.
Take anything for existence, and the male to female ratio is coming closer than they were in the past. The biggest reason is that the world is growing and things aren't shunned/frowned upon as much. In the past, you were much more prosecuted for how you acted and who you were based on genre/race/etc. etc. etc.
People are people, and it's more or less about the individual. You have bad stereotypes about what woman should be like, and that's why you don't get them.
Tony's mention of illogical responses, was totally misinterpreted btw. That comment was about how people create their own scenarios, and once more that comes down to the individual and reasoning, more so than gender specifics. Which I find hilarious that the OP bit onto that and used that as reasoning to blame the other sex for being illogical. Everyone does this... and the reasoning is because they try to rationalize an event that isn't there, or is there but they don't understand.
It's something me and my friend Karrie put as "trying to think". To which we both concluded "thinking is bad". When a situation or a response is given, people try to create meaning and situations from it. "Hi there". "OH Hi, I like you jacket".
If the original person was somewhat attracted to the second, they start off a line of logic from there. "They complimented me. Does this mean they like me? Well what if it was? If they like me, should I say something? She totally does like me I bet and that was an opening for me... I should make something of this." When the other person could just be complimenting. OR, the reverse.
The first person did take it as nothing. But the second did mean it as more than just complimenting the jacket. It was supposed to be an invitation to more... but the first person doesn't pick it up... So the 2nd person goes the opposite line "Why didn't they continue? I opened a door for them to ask me out but they didn't. They must not like me, or must not be interested in me. I bet they are just making fun of me and that's why they said hi."
And it continues infinitely in every person. Everyone creates their own chains of logic, their own interpretation of everything and want to make things out of nothing, and want nothing of things that have meaning.
Both sides are retarded, male or female. Both sides expect the other to understand what they mean when they say something, both sides put hidden meaning in words, and both sides don't get them. It has nothing to do with gender, it has to do with you as an individual. Stop creating excuses as "gender" or "that type" to defend your own inability. And in the same, they have no excuse as for you not understanding if they don't say what they mean.
If you don't understand what they're saying, ask... if they don't explain, then that's their fault. If you don't understand or create your own bull reasoning after they do explain... then that's your fault.
Quote from: PyronIkari on March 23, 2010, 06:43:54 PM
Both sides are retarded, male or female.
it is offensive to use the word "retarded" in that fashion.
Quote from: michiko nakano on March 23, 2010, 11:16:37 PM
it is offensive to use the word "retarded" in that fashion.
It is offensive that you have not read the rules of the forum and plainly fall to the level of Palin on Faux News
I agree with you pyro on the concept of gender not totally being the underlining concept of misunderstandings between people. However in connection to relationships I also concur with your logic. But from my understanding and observations, gender does play a significant role to a certain extent on certain subjects.
Of course just like you said each individual is special because of how different they are. But because of how society is designed gender does matter to a certain level. For at a early age children are reinforced to understand what gender they are and its relevance to the world around them. In this sense gender is very important to ones individuality.
Now the thing is certain subjects can mean certain things depending on how that individual was brought up to think which is then connected back to gender. But then the problem comes if we really ever had to ability to think for ourselves without the boundaries imposed by multiple things such as religion, culture, family, certain bonds, and of course gender.
Quote from: lunarknight on March 24, 2010, 02:56:06 AM
I agree with you pyro on the concept of gender not totally being the underlining concept of misunderstandings between people. However in connection to relationships I also concur with your logic. But from my understanding and observations, gender does play a significant role to a certain extent on certain subjects.
Of course just like you said each individual is special because of how different they are. But because of how society is designed gender does matter to a certain level. For at a early age children are reinforced to understand what gender they are and its relevance to the world around them. In this sense gender is very important to ones individuality.
Now the thing is certain subjects can mean certain things depending on how that individual was brought up to think which is then connected back to gender. But then the problem comes if we really ever had to ability to think for ourselves without the boundaries imposed by multiple things such as religion, culture, family, certain bonds, and of course gender.
Do you not understand that what you said is that, it isn't about gender but environmental influence? It no longer is about gender, but the affects of things treating you a certain way, which may or may not be because of gender. Did you not see how I already addressed this, and stated how this line is disappearing in modern world? You then now deviate from your original point of interactions to pursue this line... just to state you disagree with me.
Quote from: PyronIkari on March 24, 2010, 08:25:41 AM
Quote from: lunarknight on March 24, 2010, 02:56:06 AM
I agree with you pyro on the concept of gender not totally being the underlining concept of misunderstandings between people. However in connection to relationships I also concur with your logic. But from my understanding and observations, gender does play a significant role to a certain extent on certain subjects.
Of course just like you said each individual is special because of how different they are. But because of how society is designed gender does matter to a certain level. For at a early age children are reinforced to understand what gender they are and its relevance to the world around them. In this sense gender is very important to ones individuality.
Now the thing is certain subjects can mean certain things depending on how that individual was brought up to think which is then connected back to gender. But then the problem comes if we really ever had to ability to think for ourselves without the boundaries imposed by multiple things such as religion, culture, family, certain bonds, and of course gender.
Do you not understand that what you said is that, it isn't about gender but environmental influence? It no longer is about gender, but the affects of things treating you a certain way, which may or may not be because of gender. Did you not see how I already addressed this, and stated how this line is disappearing in modern world? You then now deviate from your original point of interactions to pursue this line... just to state you disagree with me.
Actually, what Lunarknight had said in his last post has plenty to do with gender, whereas what you said about
people is completely right. On a larger scale, people are people, a step down, people are male and female. On an even smaller scale, people are individuals. It's true that each an every person is unique to an extent, but the extreme majority of people fit into categories, including gender.
Gender, more often than not, is a huge part of an individual's identity. While modern circumstances make things less and less gender-specific, most people are able to say "I am female" and "I am male" as their gender-identity, and whichever gender-identity a person identifies with DOES play a role in society. While people, regardless of gender, can choose to be however they want on a smaller scale... other people in society will act differently according to whichever gender they identify with. For instance, women's clothing and products are often geared towards a female audience, whose builds/physiques and tastes typically match what is put on the market, and the same for men. The way people treat men and women, especially in social environments like say... an office, differ between whichever gender they identify with. They see women walking down the hall, whether they be wearing skirts or pants, the typical person will judge "That person is female". People ultimately judge first on outward appearance. Your sex or gender is typically a huge part of your outward appearance, along with your health, your clothing, and etc.
Growing up, many of us are taught "how to be a girl" or "how to be a boy", and our upbringings are specific to whichever sex we're born with. Along the lines, we either go with it, or think "Hey, that's not me." and are transgender. A person of male sex, can be of a female gender. That person will typically be treated as a transgendered female by society, and a natal female will typically be treated as a natal female by society. It's just how things are, and people will judge upon and treat others based on their gender, even if just a little bit.
This is because, gender is part of who a person is. Even if they're androgynous, people will think about how to treat said person with that factor in mind. If the person seems like a douche, people will treat him/her like a douche. We judge people based on what they project, who they seem to be, when they show up in our lives, and how they behave. In which sense, to many, gender doesn't mean shit and people will be seen as people by some for the most part, but in even a subtle way, their gender does affect how we treat them. Even using terms like "him" or "her" is a treatment specific to gender.
At the end of the day, people are just people. What sex they were born into should not force a person to fit into whatever mold. Whoever they choose to be, including which gender they identify with, is a part of who they are and affects societies view on them. We're intellectual beings that hold less value to "what gender is" than any other animal would, so perhaps there will be a time when people evolve beyond gender, but for now, gender is who we are.
But again, on a small scale, people are not equal to one another and are complete individuals, but on a much larger scale, everyone of the same biological build and equal, period.
It's too subjective and profound to say "girls/guys are like this", because it is both true and untrue. People should just get to know people as people. Most people that would find the opposite sex "hard to understand" or "different" to a great extent, typically has little social interaction with them to understand that sexes on our own view don't matter quite as much when we interact with people as individuals.
Quote from: michiko nakano on March 23, 2010, 11:16:37 PM
Quote from: PyronIkari on March 23, 2010, 06:43:54 PM
Both sides are retarded, male or female.
it is offensive to use the word "retarded" in that fashion.
Don't play moderator. Thanks
Quote from: Tony on March 22, 2010, 10:26:00 AM
Communication between genders can have undertones and implications that cause reactive or illogical responses.
There's "Can I borrow your pencil?" and then there's "Can I borrow your pencil?" with the hope you'll <get naked|avoid confrontation|ask a favor|...> later. :P
Can I borrow your pencil? ;)
Hmm. I can tell who seems to have a had a public speaking or psych class. I would agree with the idea that people who have a similar frame of reference have a greater chance at understanding one another and that while people of the same gender might have that frame of reference in common that does not necessarily mean that someone of the opposite gender but other similarities in their frame of reference would have any less of a chance at forming that same understanding.
Though I would think that pencils should only be borrowed in order to be used as a murder weapon..... pens are what you write with.
I think that the generalization is a dangerous route to go, and I also think that it's a very binary view of things. Gender is fluid, the sex of a person can be one of three things (as far as we know). However, when it comes to gender, there are at least eleven different genders that have been discovered through research. Gender is the identification of male, female, both, fluid, et cetra.
Also, the rigidity of the world's insistence on what is "male" and what is "female" creates a lot of problems between the sexes, and then the complete and utter ignorance on inter-sex creates more problems. In America 1/8 people are born inter-sex. It is more common than downs syndrome. But the world generally ignores this and continues to treat people as either "male" or "female" and those roles are very pronounced. Boys can't cry, they play with cars and fight. Girls wear dresses, play with dolls, are overly emotional, and will eventually be mothers. While we have come a long way from the days of women being forced to be housewives, not being allowed to vote, and so on, we are still a long way off from full equality, and in my opinion, I think if we stopped focusing on "male" and "female" it would help. I think it's damaging to insist on this rigid gender roles, and to say things like "You're acting like a girl" as though that's an insult is demeaning and creates the need in strictly "male" men to be "macho" and look down on women as the weaker sex.
There's also the damage done to strictly "female" identifying women who might like to play with toy cars and climb trees and wrestle. You're told to act like a proper lady, but what the heck is a proper lady? If that means I have to be a mother, a wife, and live at home then screw that.
Looking back on history, we can see the ways in which gender roles was instilled and the ridiculousness of the stereotypes put in place that are slowly being derailed. We can also see the vast differences in the way sex and gender viewed from one society to another. In England, women had to be covered at all times because even the bare ankle was attractive (I'm specifically referring to the Victorian era). This was due in part because of how utterly repressed everyone was. However, looking to Hawaii pre-colonization, they were bare and beautiful and women, men, trans, and intersex people coexisted without that repression of sexuality and covering up sex. On top of this, Queen Victoria did not create laws making lesbianism illegal because she believed that "women couldn't do such a thing" while the laws against gay men were strict. According to the time, women, who only had sex out of duty, could not figure out how to pleasure themselves or each other without a man.
I think, a lot of the misunderstandings that spring up between the sexes and the different genders comes from societies insistence on a very binary cast of gender roles. If we were more open, less confined, it would help immensely in bridging the gap between all people, not just "males" and "females," men and women. While there are natural tendencies between the sexes, there needs to be more room in defining "male" and "female." Society, environment, upbringing, culture all influence the way a person behaves, reacts, and thinks, but there is still a core of reactions that come from the chemical make up of a person. However, this should not define the gender or sex of a person so strictly. A woman may have motherly instincts, by default, but that does not mean that every woman a) wants to be a mother b) would make a good mother and c) that men can't be just as caring and devoted.
Sexuality has become a huge facet to take into consideration because it creates the diversity in sex and gender roles that would have been previously ignored prior to the Sexual Revolution of the early sixties. And even within sexuality, the stereotypes are not correct. Just as the gender roles and the stereotypes based on sex are incorrect.
If we could rid ourselves of these notions, and this need to fall into a box that says "this is what this sex is and does and it can't go outside of this box" then we'd all be better for it.
Thsi is what I know.>.>
Girls liek guys who are confident.You know, guys who are willing to talk and chat about random stuff and be polite.
Guys liek girls who are confident as well.Guys want girls to come up to them since guys are like that and we are lazy like that.
But that's a generalization. Not everyone is woman or every man likes the same thing. By lumping people together you assume to approach every woman and every man in the same way. Some guys are shy and some women like that. And vice versa. People vary. That's what makes life interesting, ne? That's also why interaction with other people can be so complicated.
I don't know.>.>
i was getting nowhere as a shy person and now that I talk more, girls come up to me more often.Strange that this new change also happened when I finally grew a pony tail. :-\
Quote from: Eeri-chan on May 06, 2010, 10:25:52 PM
But that's a generalization. Not everyone is woman or every man likes the same thing. By lumping people together you assume to approach every woman and every man in the same way. Some guys are shy and some women like that. And vice versa. People vary. That's what makes life interesting, ne? That's also why interaction with other people can be so complicated.
Despite it being a generalization by definition, it's essentially a basic truth. No one said about "how to approach" or anything like that, but women that like "shy" men and vice versa only like the ACT of being shy, not that they're actually shy. Most people that say they like shyness in their partner, soon show they don't as relationships progress.
As for your first post... I don't see what the point of it even is. You basically go on this femme-nazi-esque tyraid and state things that don't even apply to this topic at all.
You are arguing the extreme of "there is no such thing as gender roles" which isn't true. It's not like it was in the 60s where women were forced to be something, and men were forced to be something else, but gender roles still exist in the world, and sex does play a part in action.
I can easily prove this SCIENTIFICALLY by stating that women have more estrogen than males, and males have more testosterone than females. Both of these hormones affect behavior, therefore gender does play a part in how people act and think.
Quote from: PyronIkari on May 07, 2010, 01:12:57 PMDespite it being a generalization by definition, it's essentially a basic truth. No one said about "how to approach" or anything like that, but women that like "shy" men and vice versa only like the ACT of being shy, not that they're actually shy. Most people that say they like shyness in their partner, soon show they don't as relationships progress.
As for your first post... I don't see what the point of it even is. You basically go on this femme-nazi-esque tyraid and state things that don't even apply to this topic at all.
You are arguing the extreme of "there is no such thing as gender roles" which isn't true. It's not like it was in the 60s where women were forced to be something, and men were forced to be something else, but gender roles still exist in the world, and sex does play a part in action.
I can easily prove this SCIENTIFICALLY by stating that women have more estrogen than males, and males have more testosterone than females. Both of these hormones affect behavior, therefore gender does play a part in how people act and think.
What I said clearly went misunderstood. Either you didn't read all of it, or you just didn't understand what I said, and I don't appreciate the way you answered. I was being as respectful as possible. And if you'd read all of it, you'd have noticed that I said, quite plainly that gender roles are based in basic truths, and that yes there are gender roles, and yes, we have a basic chemical make up.
The point of avoiding generalizing is that it can be a dangerous thing to do because that leads down the road of stereotyping incorrectly. I'm not arguing that women don't have estrogen, and that men don't have testosterone. I was arguing that you have to broaden your understanding of the definitions of "gender" and "sex, "male" and "female." On top of that, gender roles exist, otherwise I wouldn't have brought up things like "boys don't cry." I am perfectly aware that they exist. My point, however, is how damaging certain roles can be. To imply that "boys don't cry" indicates the expectation in men not to show certain emotions, and if you are a man and you cry, then you must be weak. That's a role that is damaging. While women take on the role of mother, not all women
want to, though. The idea society continues to insist upon is that if a woman doesn't get married and have a baby she'll be incomplete somehow. That's ridiculous. It doesn't hold true for everyone.
And don't give me that "femme-nazi" crap. I didn't say that a woman can't make a choice to be a house wife. And I brought up things from prior to the Women's Rights movement because they related to what I was saying and the point I was trying to make. However, most of what I said has to do with the definition of gender and sex, and what the differences between those are. I don't hate men, I don't think that a woman who chooses to be a stay at home wife and mother has somehow failed the sex.
Also, I included the sex that is often ignored: inter-sex. How do you prescribe a gender role to someone with both sexes?
I think you also misunderstood me when I said "sex" based on when you said "sex plays a part in action." I did not refer to the act of sex. I referred to the biology of a person, as in "vagina," "penis," or both. Gender is the identification, and has little to no relation to the biological sex of a person. People often confuse the terms, so if you did I hope that cleared that up.
The topic was understanding, I was pointing out that I believe misunderstanding the different sexes comes from societies' strict gender binary. This is my opinion. I used facts to back up what I was saying. I admit, my point was not made all too clearly, and hopefully this can clear it up, but in that, you didn't need to try and get on a high horse and prove things "SCIENTIFICALLY" because I'm aware of the science involved, and I'm also aware that science hasn't yet been able to explain things like gender identification.
And one more thing, looking back at something you'd said on the first page, we basically are of the same opinion that sex does not mean someone will act accordingly. You said people are unique. I might not have said it in the same words, but that was my point. I said it in a more roundabout way, yes, but that's what I was getting at.
Quote from: DarkShinigamiX3 on May 07, 2010, 11:41:03 AM
I don't know.>.>
i was getting nowhere as a shy person and now that I talk more, girls come up to me more often.Strange that this new change also happened when I finally grew a pony tail. :-\
Apparently your ponytail is a magical babe magnet. :) haha. Confidence is good to have, and does help. I don't deny it, but there are certain people who do like that shy person thing. You know? I mostly just think a generalization can lead to acting in the way that one thinks works with everyone. I hope that makes sense, I think I could explain that better, but I'm kind of tired. Long day of classes.
Quote from: Eeri-chan on May 07, 2010, 02:56:34 PM
What I said clearly went misunderstood. Either you didn't read all of it, or you just didn't understand what I said, and I don't appreciate the way you answered. I was being as respectful as possible. And if you'd read all of it, you'd have noticed that I said, quite plainly that gender roles are based in basic truths, and that yes there are gender roles, and yes, we have a basic chemical make up.
I understood it quite well, and as I said... it has jack nothing to do with this discussion. This thread was about interactions and understanding the other gender. You are now bringing up things that were MENTIONED as a side point to compliment reasoning, but you are making that the basis of the conversation now... which once again, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC.
Quote
The point of avoiding generalizing is that it can be a dangerous thing to do because that leads down the road of stereotyping incorrectly. I'm not arguing that women don't have estrogen, and that men don't have testosterone. I was arguing that you have to broaden your understanding of the definitions of "gender" and "sex, "male" and "female." On top of that, gender roles exist, otherwise I wouldn't have brought up things like "boys don't cry." I am perfectly aware that they exist. My point, however, is how damaging certain roles can be. To imply that "boys don't cry" indicates the expectation in men not to show certain emotions, and if you are a man and you cry, then you must be weak. That's a role that is damaging. While women take on the role of mother, not all women want to, though. The idea society continues to insist upon is that if a woman doesn't get married and have a baby she'll be incomplete somehow. That's ridiculous. It doesn't hold true for everyone.
Avoiding generalizations is dumb, it's just as dumb as assuming a generalization is the end all truth. And you contradict yourself over and over. "Boys don't cry" and what not... IS NOT A GENDER ROLE. That is a false stereotype, that frankly, isn't even believed and hasn't been believed for decades. I think it's you that has the problem of understanding...
QuoteAlso, I included the sex that is often ignored: inter-sex. How do you prescribe a gender role to someone with both sexes?
Uh... do you even know what inter-sex is? An inter-sex child is not one that has both sexes. It's one that is BORN OF ONE SEX, but identifies more with the other sex. Physically, they are still that sex. One with BOTH SEXES is a hermaphrodite(I currently know 3). And even in these cases, despite having both sexual organs, they generally do identify with one sex more than the other, because the majority of their body is built towards one sex... despite having both reproductive organs(and generally these organs do not work properly).
QuoteI think you also misunderstood me when I said "sex" based on when you said "sex plays a part in action." I did not refer to the act of sex. I referred to the biology of a person, as in "vagina," "penis," or both. Gender is the identification, and has little to no relation to the biological sex of a person. People often confuse the terms, so if you did I hope that cleared that up.
You made sense prior. Now this one doesn't make sense at all. First you say that you were referring to the physical actuality, now you are saying it has no relation to the biological sex of a person. You realize the BIOLOGICAL is the gender... Gender is NOT the identification, and that is not the biological make up. Gender identification is a mental state. Although those are separate, the gender is still the gender of the person.
I know plenty of post ops, and pre-ops. They would seriously laugh at you if they read this.
And yet, I still don't know what any of this has to do with this thread.
There are gender roles. Men think a certain way... because they're men, and women think a certain way because their women... there is physical evidence of this as well. But, it's not ALWAYS like this, and it's not because of sex that people misunderstand each other of the opposite sex. NOTHING you have said even applies to this thread as a whole, and once more, it more sounds like you're jsut trying to state your opinion because you want to state it... despite not even having a real grasp of what you "believe".
Quote from: PyronIkari on May 07, 2010, 03:46:43 PM
Quote from: Eeri-chan on May 07, 2010, 02:56:34 PM
What I said clearly went misunderstood. Either you didn't read all of it, or you just didn't understand what I said, and I don't appreciate the way you answered. I was being as respectful as possible. And if you'd read all of it, you'd have noticed that I said, quite plainly that gender roles are based in basic truths, and that yes there are gender roles, and yes, we have a basic chemical make up.
I understood it quite well, and as I said... it has jack nothing to do with this discussion. This thread was about interactions and understanding the other gender. You are now bringing up things that were MENTIONED as a side point to compliment reasoning, but you are making that the basis of the conversation now... which once again, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC.
Quote
The point of avoiding generalizing is that it can be a dangerous thing to do because that leads down the road of stereotyping incorrectly. I'm not arguing that women don't have estrogen, and that men don't have testosterone. I was arguing that you have to broaden your understanding of the definitions of "gender" and "sex, "male" and "female." On top of that, gender roles exist, otherwise I wouldn't have brought up things like "boys don't cry." I am perfectly aware that they exist. My point, however, is how damaging certain roles can be. To imply that "boys don't cry" indicates the expectation in men not to show certain emotions, and if you are a man and you cry, then you must be weak. That's a role that is damaging. While women take on the role of mother, not all women want to, though. The idea society continues to insist upon is that if a woman doesn't get married and have a baby she'll be incomplete somehow. That's ridiculous. It doesn't hold true for everyone.
Avoiding generalizations is dumb, it's just as dumb as assuming a generalization is the end all truth. And you contradict yourself over and over. "Boys don't cry" and what not... IS NOT A GENDER ROLE. That is a false stereotype, that frankly, isn't even believed and hasn't been believed for decades. I think it's you that has the problem of understanding...
QuoteAlso, I included the sex that is often ignored: inter-sex. How do you prescribe a gender role to someone with both sexes?
Uh... do you even know what inter-sex is? An inter-sex child is not one that has both sexes. It's one that is BORN OF ONE SEX, but identifies more with the other sex. Physically, they are still that sex. One with BOTH SEXES is a hermaphrodite(I currently know 3). And even in these cases, despite having both sexual organs, they generally do identify with one sex more than the other, because the majority of their body is built towards one sex... despite having both reproductive organs(and generally these organs do not work properly).
QuoteI think you also misunderstood me when I said "sex" based on when you said "sex plays a part in action." I did not refer to the act of sex. I referred to the biology of a person, as in "vagina," "penis," or both. Gender is the identification, and has little to no relation to the biological sex of a person. People often confuse the terms, so if you did I hope that cleared that up.
You made sense prior. Now this one doesn't make sense at all. First you say that you were referring to the physical actuality, now you are saying it has no relation to the biological sex of a person. You realize the BIOLOGICAL is the gender... Gender is NOT the identification, and that is not the biological make up. Gender identification is a mental state. Although those are separate, the gender is still the gender of the person.
I know plenty of post ops, and pre-ops. They would seriously laugh at you if they read this.
And yet, I still don't know what any of this has to do with this thread.
There are gender roles. Men think a certain way... because they're men, and women think a certain way because their women... there is physical evidence of this as well. But, it's not ALWAYS like this, and it's not because of sex that people misunderstand each other of the opposite sex. NOTHING you have said even applies to this thread as a whole, and once more, it more sounds like you're jsut trying to state your opinion because you want to state it... despite not even having a real grasp of what you "believe".
Inter-sex is the new term for hermaphrodite. Trans is the term for someone who is of one sex, but identifies as the opposite of their biological sex. I know plenty of tensgender people and transsexual people. This is the new term that is considered PC. Also, a "true hermaphrodite" has to have a fully formed ovary and a fully formed testis, or two ovatestes, and that's rare. There are many variations within inter-sex. And yes, some inter-sex people do identify as one more than the other. But there are times when they start out identifying one way, then because of the hormones changing in their body switch. But that doesn't change that there are people who identify fluidly. I'm not trying to get in some heated debate, which you seem intent on doing by trying to demean my intelligence in your rude responses.
You misinterpreted my use of "boys don't cry." No duh it's bullshit. Why else would I use it in explaining that gender roles are bull. Yes, it was once a common concept in teaching young boys, that is still used by some. I know men cry. But there are people who still treat the male sex as though by being a man you can't express emotion.
Don't tell me what I do and don't believe, or tell me that I don't understand. Your response to me indicated you didn't, if you would approach the matter in a respectful way, and try just a bit to see what I was saying instead of jumping to immediate attack and morphing my words to suit said attack, you would see that I actually agree with you on certain things, and just because I might have differing views doesn't mean I'm an idiot or that I don't comprehend what I'm saying. I've been taking Queer studies. I know the difference between inter-sex and transsexual and transgender, I know people in the process of taking their hormones and people who are post-op, I understand the different between sex and gender identification, and the word "gender" is used more commonly to define the identification of a person. While it is interchangeable, I was using it in this context.
I did my best to relate this to the topic of interaction, but because you insisted on making this into some drag-down, beat-down discussion it has devolved and no longer relates to the topic at hand. I don't really give a shit though because you have absolutely no manners, and it's ridiculous that you think you can feasibly argue in such a rude, condescending manner as though I don't know what I'm talking about. I know what I believe in, I know what I'm talking about, and that's that. I may not agree with you 100% but I do know that you said something prior to this that I agreed with. I see no reason why you couldn't have approached this in a more mature manner, and I thank you to do so in the future. I wasn't trying to start anything, and I wish you wouldn't lash out so pointlessly. I'm trying to maintain a level head in this, but you are seriously pushing my patience in that and I do not like it one bit. You've been nothing but rude since the off in replying to me. You have no right to do that and I don't appreciate it. An educated discussion does not require such backhanded and blatant insults.
And my point is from the beginning it NEVER HAD anything to do with the topic at all... though
1/8 people are born a hermaphrodite? Ha... hahahaha.... hahahahaha. I'm guessing you some how horribly types .018%. But to clarify that's roughly 1 in every 5556 people.
No I didn't misinterpret your misuse of boys don't cry... because that's not the gender role at all, that's merely a stereotype. The gender role is that men have to be strong and tough... "Boys don't cry" is an example of the gender role, but not the gender role at all.
Oh, I'm sorry, you've been taking classes... in "queer studies" sorry, I understand you are an expert on the subject matter because you've taken a few classes on the subject, especially when that this still has jack nothing to do with the subject, and psychology/train of thought/reasoning/ethics are more on the subject matter.
And you're still wrong. The word gender isn't what people identify with. The word gender by definition is physical sex. If you ask a pre-op what gender they are they will tell you their physical sex, but then usually follow it up with "But I more identify with..." the sex they most identify with.
But who am I to argue, you take some classes. For someone that is so picky about terminology, your grasp on it is very... wavering.