Just wondering why since gender is so central to our lives we have such limited language to describe aspects of it, at least in English. Basically our language covers two genders, male and female and that’s it. What’s worse is the tendency among many to hold very narrow definitions of what a man or woman should be. Ah but even worse is the widespread conflation of sexual orientation, gender and physical sex as all one and the same.
They aren’t of course though they do all interact with each other. The problem is many people would take the preceding sentence as complete nonsense because of the limitations of our language. This needs to be gone into in more depth than I can muster tonight so I’ll sleep on it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
changes in social dogmas....as I'm sure you are aware, take enormous amounts of time. It would seem cultures can grow, mature into broader equations,zenith and then fade as do all children of the earth. Typecasting such as you speak of, merely explain part of the principles of yin/yang on a "mind-level". The ideas which purport positive/negative are attempts to give reason and therefore value to a system of thought. Trans gender people are viewed within a timeliness commensurate with the world at large. Allegoricaly speaking....examples fit any non-status-quo iconic image which includes women. This western civilization is founded in a consensual dogma based in Royal conservatism or a background of Autocratic religiosity. If it took nearly 400 years for women and other minorities, who fit social-behavior acceptable gender parallels, to gain the right to vote........then why would it puzzle that something as seemigly aberrant to such a society would still be floundering for social acceptance. I think the point is moot.......for this point in time/place.
Post a Comment