That’s cool, except if only certain people with certain body configurations have the uncontrolled freedom to be themselves, that’s still a problem.
Or, as long as people who do not identify with the body they were given are ostricized, there are problems. As long as there are people who are groped because their body is different, lynched because their skin is different, or kept out of certain rooms just because of growths on their bodies they have no control over, there are problems.
Just because you remove a label doesn’t mean there isnt a problem any more.
In that case, is “patriarchy” the right label? Most men (racial minorities, non-cis, etc) face systematic oppression, so it doesn’t seem like gender is the problem. Seems like oppression follows class lines, not gender, race, orientation, etc.
Maybe Kyriarchy works better for you? It describes a multi layered and interactive web of stacked series of oppressive factors that encompasses race, class, gender, sexual orientation, ablism issues etc.
Though under the definitions of patriarchy men are still oppressed. Young men and the poor are held in sway and looked at as disposable pawns and labor by the patriarchs - powerful men in the lead positions, like male heads of the family, but in this instance the ‘family’ is government, military, businesses and corperations, guilds, unions and bosses. The the buy in for those men at the bottom is that even a lowly man gets to feel like they are better at least than women. The act of being a woman is an automatic sort of failure state. Hence why men behaving in a feminine fashion are a threat. It subverts the hierarchy when someone willing chooses to behave as “lesser” of their own volition and seem happier for it.
The the buy in for those men at the bottom is that even a lowly man gets to feel like they are better at least than women.
This hasn’t been my experience, most authorities in my life have been women (teachers, bosses, etc). Even upper leadership in the company I currently work for has slightly more women than men. Obviously not everyone has the same experience, but I don’t think the picture you tried to paint is a universal truth.
Oppression follows ALL those lines. Oppression and privilege are intersections. That’s why a woman can be black but also be rich and live a better life than a dude who’s poor.
I don’t care if you call it The Wibbly Fuck Problem. Stop worrying about what it’s called and just do something about it. Damn. Everyone always worry about the unimportant shit.
How someone views themselves is up to them, you can’t force this to be accepted by someone else.
I also think I’m very attractive, can I now make you see it that way? No ofcourse not, that would be ridiculous.
As for “gender” and “sex”, it’s complete and utter nonsense to think they are 2 different things, no real psychiatrist/psychologist or biologist would ever subscribe to that.
The only people who keep using such phrases are people with a clear agenda, also people with no degree in any of those fields at all.
What IS real is “genderdysphoria”, but that’s just a fancy way of saying, as a man you can have feminine traits and vice versa… this doesn’t mean you are in a body with the wrong gender… that’s the great lie from some of the more hardcore side of the lgbtq world.
Who are more about exclusivity rather then inclusivity.
So no, I’m extremely opposed to the pronoun crowd and there is nothing you can do about that, thank F for that.
Read the whole thing just for you.
I think you need to read the whole thing yourself.
But I’ll boil it down for you, it’s 1 psychologist opinion that you could word (leaves that even optional) to differentiate between sex and gender.
However also points out, most psychologists, don’t see it that way.
That’s cool, except if only certain people with certain body configurations have the uncontrolled freedom to be themselves, that’s still a problem.
Or, as long as people who do not identify with the body they were given are ostricized, there are problems. As long as there are people who are groped because their body is different, lynched because their skin is different, or kept out of certain rooms just because of growths on their bodies they have no control over, there are problems.
Just because you remove a label doesn’t mean there isnt a problem any more.
In that case, is “patriarchy” the right label? Most men (racial minorities, non-cis, etc) face systematic oppression, so it doesn’t seem like gender is the problem. Seems like oppression follows class lines, not gender, race, orientation, etc.
Maybe Kyriarchy works better for you? It describes a multi layered and interactive web of stacked series of oppressive factors that encompasses race, class, gender, sexual orientation, ablism issues etc.
Though under the definitions of patriarchy men are still oppressed. Young men and the poor are held in sway and looked at as disposable pawns and labor by the patriarchs - powerful men in the lead positions, like male heads of the family, but in this instance the ‘family’ is government, military, businesses and corperations, guilds, unions and bosses. The the buy in for those men at the bottom is that even a lowly man gets to feel like they are better at least than women. The act of being a woman is an automatic sort of failure state. Hence why men behaving in a feminine fashion are a threat. It subverts the hierarchy when someone willing chooses to behave as “lesser” of their own volition and seem happier for it.
This hasn’t been my experience, most authorities in my life have been women (teachers, bosses, etc). Even upper leadership in the company I currently work for has slightly more women than men. Obviously not everyone has the same experience, but I don’t think the picture you tried to paint is a universal truth.
Oppression follows ALL those lines. Oppression and privilege are intersections. That’s why a woman can be black but also be rich and live a better life than a dude who’s poor.
I don’t care if you call it The Wibbly Fuck Problem. Stop worrying about what it’s called and just do something about it. Damn. Everyone always worry about the unimportant shit.
What are you doing to stop the ruling class from oppressing the rest of us? Seems like you’re just posting on Lemmy, same as me.
I see a lot of mouth and no trousers/skirt in this statement.
Pervert. I don’t have to show you my ass just so you don’t be a dick.
How someone views themselves is up to them, you can’t force this to be accepted by someone else. I also think I’m very attractive, can I now make you see it that way? No ofcourse not, that would be ridiculous.
As for “gender” and “sex”, it’s complete and utter nonsense to think they are 2 different things, no real psychiatrist/psychologist or biologist would ever subscribe to that. The only people who keep using such phrases are people with a clear agenda, also people with no degree in any of those fields at all.
What IS real is “genderdysphoria”, but that’s just a fancy way of saying, as a man you can have feminine traits and vice versa… this doesn’t mean you are in a body with the wrong gender… that’s the great lie from some of the more hardcore side of the lgbtq world. Who are more about exclusivity rather then inclusivity.
So no, I’m extremely opposed to the pronoun crowd and there is nothing you can do about that, thank F for that.
A scientific journal about the differences between sex and gender for you to read whilst you keep vomiting fecal matter.
Read the whole thing just for you. I think you need to read the whole thing yourself. But I’ll boil it down for you, it’s 1 psychologist opinion that you could word (leaves that even optional) to differentiate between sex and gender. However also points out, most psychologists, don’t see it that way.
Aka it’s her opinion, great. I disagree. Too bad.
Spoken like someone who doesn’t know any psychiatrists or psychologists…
I have a XX/XY friend. You tell me their sex/gender.
Thats literally impossible. What’s happening here is the mistake often made of confusing genotypes with gender.