Author Topic: Defining "Gender"  (Read 2186 times)

Offline taxmapper

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 682
The talk of gender and concepts of gender has been hotly debated over the past 4 years in the forefront of culture to the point of nauseum. 

But the construct of "gender' is not what many assume, and moreover (outside the various conspiracy theories) the use of "gender" as being only two and specific to male and female is in fact a recent invention. 

In reality the "concept" and "construct" of "gender" is not the assignment of sex, but the assumption of societal roles. 
Additionally, there are other aspects involved with this debate other than the talking heads on the radio.

The very word "gender" is an anglicized version of the word Genre. 

Yes the same genre of comedy, sci-fi, western, drama, etc. in movies or rock, blues, rap, country in music. 
It is the "assumption of and presentation of" a sub-group. 

I attached several simple links below to give you an example. You can research this quite heavily and look for information PRIOR to about 2017. (Less influenced by popular culture). 

One place to read is also jstor, where you can find articles dating as far back as the 1800's.  There you can find a healthy does of information not covered by modern media. 

 

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender

1
aa subclass within a grammatical class (such as noun, pronoun, adjective, or verb) of a language that is partly arbitrary but also partly based on distinguishable characteristics (such as shape, social rank, manner of existence, or sex) and that determines agreement with and selection of other words or grammatical forms
bmembership of a word or a grammatical form in such a subclass
can inflectional form (see INFLECTION sense 2a) showing membership in such a subclass


2 
aSEX sense 1a
the feminine gender
bthe behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex



Etymology
Noun
Middle English gendre, from Anglo-French genre, gendre, from Latin gener-, genus birth, race, kind, gender — more at KIN
Verb
Middle English gendren, from Anglo-French gendrer, from Latin generare — more at GENERATE

https://open.maricopa.edu/culturepsychology/chapter/632/



Gender is a term that refers to social or cultural distinctions and roles associated with being male or female.  Gender is not determined by biology in any simple way. At an early age, we begin learning cultural norms for what is considered masculine (trait of a male) and feminine (trait of a female). Gender is conveyed and signaled to others through clothing and hairstyle, or mannerisms like tone of voice, physical bearing, and facial expression. For example, children in the United States may associate long hair, fingernail polish or dresses with femininity. Later in life, as adults, we often conform to these norms by behaving in gender specific ways: men build houses and women bake cookies (Marshall, 1989; Money et al., 1955; Weinraub et al., 1984).

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-eight-genders-in-the-talmud/

Thought nonbinary gender was a modern concept? Think again. The ancient Jewish understanding of gender was far more nuanced than many assume. 
The Talmud, a huge and authoritative compendium of Jewish legal traditions, contains in fact no less than eight gender designations including: 
  • Zachar, male.
  • Nekevah, female.
  • Androgynos, having both male and female characteristics.
  • Tumtum, lacking sexual characteristics.
  • Aylonit hamah, identified female at birth but later naturally developing male characteristics.
  • Aylonit adam, identified female at birth but later developing male characteristics through human intervention.
  • Saris hamah, identified male at birth but later naturally developing female characteristics.
  • Saris adam, identified male at birth and later developing female characteristics through human intervention.

https://www.buzzworthy.com/native-americans-five-genders/

Two Spirits, Five Genders

“Two Spirit” is a blanket term, and one that wasn’t even widely used until the late 20th century, but it describes the genderqueer, transgender, and gender fluid individuals who were accepted and well respected in many Native American societies. The term “Two Spirit” comes from the idea that everyone has both a male and female spirit within their body, and a person’s identity comes not from their physical form, but from whichever of the two spirits is more dominant within them. Sometimes, the two spirits were equals, or changed which one was dominant many times, and it’s important to note that being Two Spirited is an observation on gender, but not sexual orientation.
Different Native nations had different words for Two Spirit individuals, and not all of them can be easily translated into English. In the Cherokee Nation, for example, the word asegi is a blanket term, with more specific words to describe male-assigned and female-assigned people. In Inuit culture, the term sipiniq roughly translates to “infant whose sex changes at birth”, and in the language of the Lakota, winkte is the term used for male-bodied people who live as women, and bloka egla wa ke is the term for Two Spirited people born female. In Navajo society, the term is nadleehe, which means “one who is in a constant state of change” or “one who is transforming”.

https://unibam.org/2013/05/24/beyond-binary-definitions-of-gender-3rd/

in the article below, note the date: 


Written by Manase Chiweshe
Thursday, 16 September 2010 07:46

Persistent and unmistakable ‘third’ or alternative gender subcultures have always existed in one form or another.(2) There are 
examples from across the world, such as the ‘mahu’ and ‘aikane’ of Polynesia, the ‘berdache’ of Native American tribes, the ‘sekhet’ of prehistoric Egypt, the ‘eunouchos’ of ancient Greece and Rome, the ‘saris’ of the Israelites and the ‘mu’omin’ or ‘trusted men’ of the Syrians. There were traditional third-gender roles in African aboriginal tribes such as the Mbo people of Zaire and amongst the palace and harem guards of the Arabs and Chinese. Don’t forget the cross-dressing entertainers of Manila and Bangkok and the ‘hijra’ and ‘jogappa’ dancers and temple priests of North and South India.

This last one is of great interest for a whole host of reasons, but if you read yopu'll get the jist. 

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/goethe-yearbook-15/new-mantheories-of-masculinity-around-1800/5A16951683006558DA37BA9FF5ECF3E7

Summary

RECENT HISTORICAL RESEARCH HAS PLACED considerable emphasis on the redefinition of masculinity around 1800. Scholars have rightly pointed to the French Revolution as a major event in the transformation of masculinity, an event that left its mark not only on France but also on other parts of Continental Europe. In the German countries, changes began to emerge during the 1780s, especially in the field of education; yet, it is only after the devastating Prussian defeat of 1806 that the question of masculinity receives official attention. For the Prussian reformers, the debacle of the Prussian army at Jena and Auerstedt represented much more than a simple military failure; rather, it signaled fundamental deficiencies within army and society that the state must confront. The reformers felt that a fundamental reorganization of the Prussian army was necessary in order to confront Napoleon's forces. At the heart of this question was the creation of a new type of soldier who would be an equal to the revolutionary spirit of the French soldiers. He was supposed to be both a warrior and a citizen, motivated to fight for his fatherland without regard for his life. The glorious Prussian army had been defeated, the reformers realized, because it consisted of soldiers who had been pressed to fight and had no reason to identify with the cause of the war. A new kind of virility was needed, not only within the army, but also at the base of the social structure from which the state draws its soldiers. Eighteenth-century masculinity came under close scrutiny and was considered deficient.  The negative verdict pertained to the aristocrat, who serves as the lord, as well as the scholar (der Gelehrte), who primarily reads and writes, and also the merchants, who focus their energies on profit making. They were equally culpable because of their lack of manliness in a situation of political and social crisis. In short, a new type of manly subject was needed that was strongly motivated to act, but also demonstrated responsibility and self-restraint in his decision making. When one looks at the writings of the leading educators and intellectuals of the time it is hard to overlook the urgency of the quest. These authors make clear that they are responding to a serious crisis that is eroding the existing social order. Most of them do not defend the old regime. They understand themselves as reformers who envision a better and stronger social order that results from rethinking the concepts of man and manliness and improves civil society. They wanted to overcome the slow disintegration of the older family order, which had legitimized the domination of the patriarch—either in the context of the old Ganzes Haus or in that of the more recent, smaller family controlled by the father. The diffusion of established social roles, especially the weakening of the father's role, necessitated a new conceptualization of masculinity to address the growing social and political pressures. While the military reformers in Prussia after 1806 responded primarily to the revolutionary French army and attempted to adapt its principles to the needs of the Prussian state, the general discourse on the new man had already emerged in the 1790s, although it did not initially address the military aspect. The question directing the discourse did not consider the creation of a better soldier; rather, it concerned the needs of civil society for responsible and effective participants. The new definition or definitions of masculinity were to assist with the transformation of the older Ständegesellschaft, although these broader issues were not always explicitly discussed. The authors who participated in the debate typically had more limited goals. They wanted to improve their communities through new cultural norms. For them, the central questions were ethical ones that needed to be resolved by a fundamental redefinition of masculinity. Yet this redefinition is not strictly limited to moral issues. It concerns physical appearance and cultural education as well











Offline Justagirl💃

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1072
  • When life gives you curves, Flaunt them! 🤗
Unfortunately society is what has been taught to them. 

By broadening our understanding in the classroom we can broaden our understanding in the real world as those mature into adulthood. 
When life gives you curves,
flaunt them! 💃
💋Birdie💋

Offline WPW717

  • Gold Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 261
Taxmapper …

     WOW

and I thought I had a grip on understanding …
Nope !
Regards, Bob

Offline Parity

  • Silver Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
Wow that was a good read.
Thanks for that deep dive.
This is a topic I wish the general population would look at objectively.  We all are witness to the fact that there is not one  pure M and F.  Male and Female is as I see it a general term.  There is a huge spectrum in between. After reading more post it is clear to me we are diverse in our own identity.  

Offline taxmapper

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 682
Thanks. 




over the past time from when I wrote this, I have studied even more and discovered that much of what we today understand in the "gender" argument was laied out for us during the 1940-50's. 

Based on concepts and ideas left over from the mid-late 1800's and part of an overall aspect involved with the framing of a society based on a template imagined by a select few for their own selfish purposes. 

there isa  great deal more than what I posted, but for now I think its sufficient to say that what were hearing today is literally the surface. 


Offline gotgyne

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
We all are witness to the fact that there is not one  pure M and F.  Male and Female is as I see it a general term.  There is a huge spectrum in between. After reading more post it is clear to me we are diverse in our own identity. 
Since decades I'm convinced that gender is a continuum, leaning to one side or the other. In my opinion it is best if well balanced. Look at the Yin Yang Symbol.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2023, 01:08:26 PM by gotgyne »
A bra is just an article of clothing for people with breasts.

Offline Moobzie

  • Silver Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 186
Physically:
xy = male
xx = female

Psychologically:
How individuals "identify" (or act out) sexual preferences.  As was posted, there have been and are many, many ways in which individuals act out their sexual preferences.

The vast majority of humans are physically distinguished xx or xy.  And most of these "identify" as what they are: female or male.

Seems like what has been posted is trying to change peoples' concepts of physical biology.  There have been a lot of comments like: "society needs to ______ (fill in the blank) to match how I feel".
If that floats your boat, as they say.

I personally don't care if 'society' thinks gynecomastia is abnormal.  In fact, I agree.  That said, my gynecomastia does not make me less of a person, nor does any other 'condition' make anyone less of a person.  I often wear a bra because I need the support provided - and I realize that most men do NOT need to wear a bra.  Saying everyone should accept gynecomastia, or intersex, or ______ (fill in the blank) as normal is like a person with six fingers demanding that ALL gloves be made with six fingers so he will feel better about having six fingers.

Anyhow, as far as boat floating goes, interesting flotilla here in this thread.

 

MyLife

  • Guest
Physically:
xy = male
xx = female

Psychologically:
How individuals "identify" (or act out) sexual preferences.  As was posted, there have been and are many, many ways in which individuals act out their sexual preferences.

The vast majority of humans are physically distinguished xx or xy.  And most of these "identify" as what they are: female or male.

Seems like what has been posted is trying to change peoples' concepts of physical biology.  There have been a lot of comments like: "society needs to ______ (fill in the blank) to match how I feel".
If that floats your boat, as they say.

I personally don't care if 'society' thinks gynecomastia is abnormal.  In fact, I agree.  That said, my gynecomastia does not make me less of a person, nor does any other 'condition' make anyone less of a person.  I often wear a bra because I need the support provided - and I realize that most men do NOT need to wear a bra.  Saying everyone should accept gynecomastia, or intersex, or ______ (fill in the blank) as normal is like a person with six fingers demanding that ALL gloves be made with six fingers so he will feel better about having six fingers.

Anyhow, as far as boat floating goes, interesting flotilla here in this thread.

 
This is my understanding of the subject too

Offline taxmapper

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 682
The definition of gender is defiantly not sex. 

As I started with, sex (biological male-female) are the only two models that the package comes in. 

But alot of us have an intermix of the other side. 
In this case female. 

That is NOT gender. 


Gender was originally a construct of language to define masculine, feminine and neuter. 
It evolved because of the aspects of roles and how one moves around. 

As I pointed out before, even in the middle ages and defiantly in ancient times, it was well recognized that gender was a construct of aspects, not a specific sexual definition. 

Understanding that point is key to grasp why the current debate is at least IMO, a faux argument designed to segregate and divide society. 


Offline Moobzie

  • Silver Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 186
From Taxmapper:
"Gender was originally a construct of language to define masculine, feminine and neuter."
This is basically true for ALL words in every language.  A 'construct to define' some thing.
The current arguments in the socio-political arena are not really about language - they are about changing reality (through language) to conform to whatever fantasy is in the mind of the wannabe.  In the state I live in public elementary schools have been ordered to "teach" K-8 children how to perform sex acts - with very, very graphic picture books.  I think it is very important for those of us here to not confuse issues we may have with our 'hormonal stew' (as one of our members has so aptly termed it !) with the wider debate currently raging culturally.  And to realize that when some 'normie' (as another contributor here has labelled people without sexual physical issues like gyno) encounters a man wearing a bra it may give rise to an assumption that the guy in the bra is an advocate for sexual license of all kinds.  
So, when it occurs with me personally, I simply tell them about gynecomastia and that I have it.  I've had no problems with anyone in such instances,  

Offline Justagirl💃

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1072
  • When life gives you curves, Flaunt them! 🤗
The definition of gender is defiantly not sex.

As I started with, sex (biological male-female) are the only two models that the package comes in.

But alot of us have an intermix of the other side.
In this case female.

That is NOT gender.


Gender was originally a construct of language to define masculine, feminine and neuter.
It evolved because of the aspects of roles and how one moves around.

As I pointed out before, even in the middle ages and defiantly in ancient times, it was well recognized that gender was a construct of aspects, not a specific sexual definition.

Understanding that point is key to grasp why the current debate is at least IMO, a faux argument designed to segregate and divide society.
In my case 'gender' was quite the challenge for the delivery physician I'm sure.

Although I do have testes like all men do, I have the labia and crease like most females as well. The other aspect of male anatomy is quite obviously missing, and resembles an enlarged clitoris instead. I have never been able to 'pee on trees'.

My chromosomes are XY, but I have a uterus and fallopian tubes. I still have a small prostate lurking in the mix.

One might call me an abnormality, but only be partially correct. It's well known that 1/1500 babies will be born intersex, and it's much more common that one thinks. Maybe as common as red hair! The extent of intersex varies greatly, but it's very common!

One could be like my doctor and blindly label me as 'male' based solely off my chromosomes because it's what the 'social construct' has determined to be the standard, but you would be calling a person that contains a 'womb' the wrong gender. 

I'm born 'on-the-fence' regardless of my chromosomes, and It's 'my choice' as to which side of the fence I fall. 

« Last Edit: October 31, 2023, 06:18:10 AM by Justagirl💃 »

Offline Evolver

  • Gold Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
Physically:
xy = male
xx = female

Psychologically:
How individuals "identify" (or act out) sexual preferences.  As was posted, there have been and are many, many ways in which individuals act out their sexual preferences.

The vast majority of humans are physically distinguished xx or xy.  And most of these "identify" as what they are: female or male.

Seems like what has been posted is trying to change peoples' concepts of physical biology.  There have been a lot of comments like: "society needs to ______ (fill in the blank) to match how I feel".
If that floats your boat, as they say.

I personally don't care if 'society' thinks gynecomastia is abnormal.  In fact, I agree.  That said, my gynecomastia does not make me less of a person, nor does any other 'condition' make anyone less of a person.  I often wear a bra because I need the support provided - and I realize that most men do NOT need to wear a bra.  Saying everyone should accept gynecomastia, or intersex, or ______ (fill in the blank) as normal is like a person with six fingers demanding that ALL gloves be made with six fingers so he will feel better about having six fingers.

Anyhow, as far as boat floating goes, interesting flotilla here in this thread.

 
It continually amazes me how much the waters keep getting muddied around this issue. It's a shame that we all can't look at simplistically. Am I the only one who sees it like this?

SEX: xy for male, xx for female, xxy for intersex.

SEXUALITY: straight, gay, bi, pan, etc.

GENDER: how we identify, which in some cases has absolutely nothing to do with sex, and in all cases has nothing to do with sexuality.

"Many ways in which individuals act out their sexual preferences." What does that even mean? Surely you don't think that people 'act' non-binary regarding gender for example, or 'act' gay regarding sexuality for example, in that they are just putting it on?

Just after some clarity, that's all.

Offline Parity

  • Silver Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
'Sex' and 'gender' are often used interchangeably, despite having different meanings: 
 
Sex refers to a set of biological attributes in humans and animals. It is primarily associated with physical and physiological features including chromosomes, gene expression, hormone levels and function, and reproductive/sexual anatomy. Sex is usually categorized as female or male but there is variation in the biological attributes that comprise sex and how those attributes are expressed.
Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviours, expressions and identities of girls, women, boys, men, and gender diverse people. It influences how people perceive themselves and each other, how they act and interact, and the distribution of power and resources in society. Gender identity is not confined to a binary (girl/woman, boy/man) nor is it static; it exists along a continuum and can change over time. There is considerable diversity in how individuals and groups understand, experience and express gender through the roles they take on, the expectations placed on them, relations with others and the complex ways that gender is institutionalized in society.

Unquote. 


 Canadian Institutes of Health Research





Offline Moobzie

  • Silver Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 186
Evolver:
When I wrote "act" I meant how someone behaves, or lives / engages in sexual expression.
To your question regarding "putting it on", not sure what you meant by the phrase.  What I meant was that there are a lot of ways individuals choose to live out sexually - straight , gay or whatever.

Offline Parity

  • Silver Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
 I just wanted to clarify that I didn't intend to offend or suggest the topic be settled.  I was glad it was brought up and in doing so I did a deeper dive and learned a lot.  Until now I really didn't know the difference between the two.  I was like the general public I guess.  I now have a better understanding as well now.  


 

SMFPacks CMS 1.0.3 © 2024