Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 10:59 am
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Oct 29, 2019 3:01 pm
I notice that a lot of gender theory talks two different ways.
First of all, what in the world does ''Gender Essentialism'' even mean for christ sake?
It's an extremely simple idea. Anyone can grasp it.
Either there is something specific, irreproducible and precious in being male or female, or there is not any such thing. That's the only two ways it can possibly be.
"Gender Essentialism" is the idea that being a woman (or a man) is not merely reducible to being the same as the opposite gender. There's something special and unique about men, and something unique and special about women.
If you don't believe that, you're not a Gender Essentialist. If you do, you are.
See? Very simple.
surely people will generally talk about whatever which way they choose to talk about?
They might: but it would be irrational to do so. Because if there is even one thing unique or special about being one gender or the other, then GE is true; and if there's not, it's false. And that's just logic.
Unless you are suggesting men just want to talk about motor cars and women just want to talk about dolls houses?
Is that what you think?
It all boils down to stereo typical conditioning on how people are moulded from birth.
If you think that, then you're
against Gender Essentialism. You think all apparent differences merely come from socialization. A boy is just a girl that has been socialized to think he's a boy.
Have I got your view right, now?