Gender Essentialism

[Immanuel Can]

It's interesting...right now, there's been 144 views.

Everybody can see the question. It's a mainstream Feminist question. It's a simple, straightforward question. And it's a question that has to have a definite answer, because anybody can reason that it HAS to be one or the other...there's literally no possibility of any third option.

How could lit possibly be, then, that so few are courageous enough to answer? Two, really... Henry, and the Woofer.

And why would that be...?

[Dontaskme]

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? surely people will generally talk about whatever which way they choose to talk about?
Unless you are suggesting men just want to talk about motor cars and women just want to talk about dolls houses?

It all boils down to stereo typical conditioning on how people are moulded from birth.

Example 1 ....girls are given pink birthday cards when they born.
Example 2 ....boys are given blue birthday cards when they are born.

Example 3 ....girls are encouraged to play with dolls and dolls houses at play school.
Example 4 ....boys are encouraged to play with toy cars and garages at play school.

It's all to do with those early years of a childs life and what is stereo typically imposed upon them in the form of what is expected of them by their carers.

None of this human activity is essential or a requirement to BE who you always are, except to say that once expectation has been well grooved into the believing mind, the resulting display of action is a reaction of what that mind has been conditioned to believe, where the old ingrained habits usually die hard. But that's all changing now. Women act like men and men act like women. Men talk like women and women talk like men. Men wear make-up too. And women don't shave their lady gardens or their legs and arm pits. Both men and women do all the things men and women have been doing since the dawn of time. Change happens but nothing changes.



.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

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? surely people will generally talk about whatever which way they choose to talk about?
Unless you are suggesting men just want to talk about motor cars and women just want to talk about dolls houses?

It all boils down to stereo typical conditioning on how people are moulded from birth.

Example 1 ....girls are given pink birthday cards when they born.
Example 2 ....boys are given blue birthday cards when they are born.

Example 3 ....girls are encouraged to play with dolls and dolls houses at play school.
Example 4 ....boys are encouraged to play with toy cars and garages at play school.

It's all to do with those early years of a childs life and what is stereo typically imposed upon them in the form of what is expected of them by their carers.

None of this human activity is essential or a requirement to BE who you always are, except to say that once expectation has been well grooved into the believing mind, the resulting display of action is a reaction of what that mind has been conditioned to believe, where the old ingrained habits usually die hard. But that's all changing now. Women act like men and men act like women. Men talk like women and women talk like men. Men wear make-up too. And women don't shave their lady gardens or their legs and arm pits. Both men and women do all the things men and women have been doing since the dawn of time. Change happens but nothing changes.



.

'Lady gardens' wtf??

[henry quirk]

"How could lit possibly be, then, that so few are courageous enough to answer? Two, really... Henry, and the Woofer. And why would that be...? "

Cuz most folks here are thin-skinned chickenshits (lots of 'males' and 'females; few men and women).

[Immanuel Can]

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?

[Immanuel Can]

Cuz most folks here are thin-skinned chickenshits (lots of 'males' and 'females; few men and women).

The interesting question is, "What are they so afraid of?"

You're not afraid.

What are they thinking is going to happen to them?

[henry quirk]

Domesticated animals are blinkered. Literally, they cannot see beyond the walls of the chute. Your opening post is alien, unrecognizable, and therefore, gibberish to them.

or mebbe I'm a'judgin' too harshly

[Immanuel Can]

Domesticated animals are blinkered. Literally, they cannot see beyond the walls of the chute. Your opening post is alien, unrecognizable, and therefore, gibberish to them.

or mebbe I'm a'judgin' too harshly

I have no idea how it can be hard to grasp. We could put it this way: "either women are something special, or they are not: which are they?" Who could not answer such a question?

[henry quirk]

Domesticated animals are blinkered. Literally, they cannot see beyond the walls of the chute. Your opening post is alien, unrecognizable, and therefore, gibberish to them.

or mebbe I'm a'judgin' too harshly

I have no idea how it can be hard to grasp. We could put it this way: "either women are something special, or they are not: which are they?" Who could not answer such a question?

The good folks of the PNF.

[Immanuel Can]

The good folks of the PNF.

It's 213 views now, with only two straight answers, one implied answer, two aimless carpers who won't answer at all, and the rest is total silence.

Awesome. I've never seen a simple question destroy the field so fast.

[henry quirk]

for stumping the 'intelligentsia'

[Arising_uk]

Awesome. I've never seen a simple question destroy the field so fast.

Never crossed your mind it might be you?

[Nick_A]

I C

I notice that a lot of gender theory talks two different ways. So I'd like to know which of the following two positions is to be considered genuinely "Feminist".

First of all don’t confuse being a feminist with being a woman. Feminism has a specific meaning. Here is a standard dictionary definition:

noun
1. the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes.

Can there be females who believe something is more important than rights?

“One cannot imagine St. Francis of Assisi talking about rights.” Simone Weil

Perhaps a real woman as opposed to a feminist is concerned with something essentially more important than rights. The fight for rights in secular society is of secondary importance. Men may need to be stupid but a real woman knows she doesn’t have to be even more stupid in the fight for equality in stupidity.

So do questions 1 and 2 refer to feminists we can define but not to women secularism cannot. That can be good starting point

[Immanuel Can]

I C

I notice that a lot of gender theory talks two different ways. So I'd like to know which of the following two positions is to be considered genuinely "Feminist".

First of all don’t confuse being a feminist with being a woman.

I did not say such a thing. I did not even imply such a thing. And it was totally irrelevant to the question posed. A man can answer, a woman can answer. No big deal.

Just answer the question: do you believe there is anything at all unique or special in being a woman? Yes or no? And if yes, what do you think it is?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Perhaps it's such a stupid, meaningless question that it doesn't warrant an answer?