The Abolition of Gender

[Raithe]

One of those random articles stumbled across..

 

American Thinker - The Abolition of Gender

 

Which actually made me think, since I got accused of being all chauvenistic the other day for opening a door for a lady, and pretty much got slammed for not recognising equal rights and wotnot..

 

 

The hope appears to be that the end of discrimination will be achieved by rendering the sexes fungible -- or better yet, nonexistent. The elimination of gender distinction and the establishment of androgyny are to usher in communal utopia.

 

For example, the most recent Council of Europe convention on gender has defined gender as a purely social construct. Eliminating biological distinctions as the determinative factor of gender, the Council has redefined gender as meaning "the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for women and men."

 

Lest it be thought the Council's definition of gender is a mere aberration, its "advanced" sociological philosophies advocating the abolition of gender are to be found in academia, both here and abroad.

 

Going further on..

 

Alas, the mental illness has metastasized, establishing colonies of the mentally deranged in North America, including the California Teachers' Association, which, as reported by the Christian Examiner, held a conference during which the association's conference presenters and program received materials advocating "gender liberation."

 

According to the materials, male-female distinctions must be eliminated in order to "liberate" children from unnecessary stereotypes about what it means to be male or female. To be absolutely clear, the anti-genderists are not seeking "equal rights," but obliteration of the distinctions between male and female.

 

For example, the conference literature included this instruction on "gender etiquette":

 

[Malcador]

Women actually get snarky over holding a door ? Always thought that was some myth I hear on /.

[Morgoth]

I'm actually glad I don't live in one of these brainwashed Anglo-fail countries where 180

[Raithe]

Heh, I've actually had a lot of positive commnets from women over those simple courtesies. Quite a few times when I've been out with a group of my friends, and I'm the one who does that for the various girlfriends of my mates and the gf's will say how rare it is, and that it is nice to see someone still knows how to do such. Usually with a few digs at my mates who forget to do so...

 

So yeah, having a lady turn around and act all snarky over it was a touch of a surprise and out of the "normal" range of behaviour to it.

[Drowsy Emperor]

Lewis is right.

 

Besides most of this stuff is ivory tower intellectual gibberish - most women, that being 90%+ still behave like women and expect to be treated as such

 

A case could be made for the opposite stance - that the enforced equality (which turns into bias towards women in certain cases) has become pretty ridiculous and even damaging for society.

Edited January 17, 2012 by Drowsy Emperor

[Gorth]

I'm all for equal rights, equal opportunity, equal pay for equal work, equal custody right for children etc. (which by the way works both ways), but to make a sweeping statement declaring all differences gone is as absurd as declaring the number Pi as having the value 4 as a matter of convenience. It may streamline math, but it sure makes for some funny building projects in the future.

 

There *are* physiological and psychological differences.

 

[Tigranes]

The holding-door thing was a fairly important thing in the feminist movement, AFAIK - the idea being that individual men are jsut trying to be nice human beings holding doors open for women, but it was borne out from and reproducing underlying ideas. E.g. it is the man who is the dominant figure in this social situation, so just as he would introduce her to other people at a ****tail party, he opens the door for her and she enters as part of his entourage. Obviously, a lot of people were bemused/annoyed that what they saw as an innocuous or well-meaning gesture could be criticized, but now, it's become a lot more common that people will just hold the door open for other people, man, woman, womyn, etc. So it's not quite so simple as saying "crazy feminists" (or its opposite).

 

The irony being that the ultimate aim of a feminist wouldn't have been to stop men from holding doors open for women - it would have been that women can hold doors open for men, and men can hold doors open for women. So at this point, I don't think it's productive for any woman to be offended if you're nice enough to do it. It would be silly if we were too afraid to be nice to women (and that is sadly true in some cases). But a man who argues "bloody feminists, I like to hold doors open for women and lot of women like it, so it's all nonsense" isn't really seeing the whole picture.

 

For the argument at large, I think it's much more interesting to look at Lewis' assertion on its own, because when we tie it solely to the specific case of gender / sexuality we get mired in this huge amount of existing pet peeves, sore spots and hashed arguments (as we've already seen, it's pretty difficult for us to talk about holding doors open without falling back on a not-very-constructive polarity of Kill the Patriarchy vs. Crazy Feminists). There are certain foundational pillars for contemporary Western society, and they are being challenged more cnosciously and actively than at any other point in history. I actually think one of the biggest aspects of this process is our loss or devaluing of ritual. Ritual doesn't necessarily just mean sacrificing animals or praying to God, but what we've done is devalue and discredit some rituals as 'religious nonsense' or 'superstitious / nonscientific nonsense' (or both), and then refuse to admit that the other rituals we partake in are rituals (easy one - nationalism). Separate from whether all religion is crap and stuff like that, which isn't my point, there are important social functions fulfilled by rituals, and we are in the process of denying or destroying our rituals without fully understanding those functions, how we might replace those functions. Put simply, we are seeing major transformations in the way we build solidarity, we build common definitions of ideas and values, and we participate in shared experiences - or, even when those ways stay the same, people often no longer recognize them as important.

 

(And God help me if someone responds with "Religion is stupid and should be eradicated", because that's uh, nowhere near the point.)

[Gorgon]

I think it's fine that they want personality to come to the forground at the expense of biology and historical norms. It's not going to work though, just IMHO.

[Orogun01]

Guys, guys...you're failing to see an important silver lining here.

 

No gender, No gender specific bathrooms, Co-ed college rooms, No more separate sauna rooms.

 

I for one fully support the abolition of gender, I never used it anyways.

[Bos_hybrid]

I don't know, this brings visions of that creepy ST TNG episode where everyone looks alike and behaves the same way.

 

No thank you.

[Calax]

Guys, guys...you're failing to see an important silver lining here.

 

No gender, No gender specific bathrooms, Co-ed college rooms, No more separate sauna rooms.

 

I for one fully support the abolition of gender, I never used it anyways.

Did I just hear a cartoonish "SPRONG!" in the backround there bucko?

 

The idea of removing all gender is just ridiculous. On the base biological level, men and women operate and thing different things. Women are hunting for a man who can provide for them and their offspring during the necessary parts of their lives, while the men are just siring up an entire civilization as fast as they can.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

The idea of removing all gender is just ridiculous. On the base biological level, men and women operate and thing different things.

 

I'm on a phone at the moment, and thus will have to write more when I get to a PC, but I've got to disagree with you as biological sex and socially-built gender are two completely different things. Sex does not equal gender, nor does gender have real meaning outside of labling and norm-setting.

[Walsingham]

I hold doors open for both sexes. In the Uk this is a socially complex point. It does have an element of dominance to it, but it's also signalling a degree of relaxedness about the point. Hence you can go for a meeting with the uber-boss of whoevere and he will let you go through a door first on some occasions but on others will expect to have it held for him out of deference.

 

Interestingly one of the reasons the Zulu were regarded as bastards by some whites was that they would insist on going through a door before a woman. However, this was because in Zulu society what's on the other side of a door is frequently dangerous and needs to be fought hand to hand. Hence it was the MOST polite zulus who got labelled as rude buggers.

 

 

However, the notion that both sexes are equal is nonsense. We are not identical and hence we can't be equal in any specific context. Some of the difference is biological and some socially delivered, IMO.

 

Throwing out simple courtesy in pursuit of a chimera smacks of lunatic dream chasing.

[Calax]

The idea of removing all gender is just ridiculous. On the base biological level, men and women operate and thing different things.

 

I'm on a phone at the moment, and thus will have to write more when I get to a PC, but I've got to disagree with you as biological sex and socially-built gender are two completely different things. Sex does not equal gender, nor does gender have real meaning outside of labling and norm-setting.

Yes, they are different things, but they are linked in the fact that biologically we are under different pressures and have different capabilities that formulate different psychologies.

 

Removing gender would mean that men and women would have to come to terms with being able to stare at dangly bits or jiggly bits (not saying nudity would be the norm, but I'd expect that with gender eliminated, Lockers bathrooms saunas and other locations that are normally gender/sex separated would be uni).

 

http://kotaku.com/5875690/these-might-be-t...s-on-the-planet

 

Examine that, and the comments section.

[Gorgon]

They tried that in the 60s, didn't take on a large scale.

[HoonDing]

I don't know, this brings visions of that creepy ST TNG episode where everyone looks alike and behaves the same way.

 

No thank you.

I was thinking the same thing.

 

And of course, Riker still scored.

[Blarghagh]

I hate this prevailing idea that all gender distinction is inherently bad. Yes, I agree that for example a woman that does the same job as a man should be paid the same, equal rights and equel treatment on that kind of issues. On a social level, however, gender roles that do no harm and are part of personal identity such as chivalry or display* I have no problem with.

 

*Plus, anyone who has ever been with a woman can tell you they are more likely to put on make up and doll themselves up when they go to hang out with other women than when they are going to hang around with men.

 

EDIT: To clarify, I do think that self image problem due to popular culture lead to a lot of problems for girls, and this approach is not perfect. I have yet to consolidate issues such as this with my personal views, you can't make up distinctive rules or views for everything.

Edited January 18, 2012 by TrueNeutral

[Nonek]

Would I have to shave me chin whiskers, if so I emphatically disagree with this genderless business. As for opening doors; I find a playful pat on the rump serves to defuse any tension in such a moment (or result in a good healthy slap across the jowls which has its own attractions).

[Walsingham]

Like Tigs I agree that for social purposes people have to be treated equally. But at an engineering coal-face level they simply aren't. Physically the point is glaringly obvious, psychologically it's more subtle but sometimes more pronounced. Perhaps it's more constructed than predestined. But try and (for example) manage two single sex teams identically and you're going to get very divergent results.

[Guard Dog]

The women I seved with in the Marines were always complaining they could do any job a man could do. It told one I'd believe it they day one of them actually finished a run.

 

Never happened.

[Walsingham]

Whereas I've known a couple of extremely tough female soldiers (by our wimpy Territorial standards, anyway ). But the point is they were undeniably different. Denying distinct differences in attitude and approach, emotion, and physical shape is tantamount to being a flat earther. Except that the earth has the good grace to appear flat.

[Walsingham]

As a point of clarification I'm still of the opinion that there should be equality of opportunity, and equality of reward. I'm also a big fun of taking an enlightened view of what contribution people can make through being different and hving different strengths.

 

I'm just implacably against wallpapering over differences, and of trying to bull**** people about what people really can do. Because I think it's a huge ****ing granite obstacle to diminishing prejudice.

[Meshugger]

So with a genderless society you will not feel helpless desire for the feminine body? Or the need of a man's warm and comforting arms in a heat of passion? It is just an it?

 

Sounds like this theory was made by people to people who haven't experienced any real passion in their lifetimes.

[213374U]

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/01/07/adieu-...ns-sexist-term/

 

^could they be any more ham-fisted about their PC enforcement?

 

 

[snip]

Maybe "crazy feminists" isn't looking at the whole picture, but that may well be the underlying issue. Every single self-professed feminist (and some that wouldn't man* up and admit it too) I've met was bat**** and just not too happy with their female self. The proposed neutering of gender roles that have been established by hundreds of thousands of years of evolution with little but slogans and inflammatory rhetoric is... crazy.

 

*Oh I crack myself up

[Asol]

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/01/07/adieu-...ns-sexist-term/

 

^could they be any more ham-fisted about their PC enforcement?

 

 

[snip]

Maybe "crazy feminists" isn't looking at the whole picture, but that may well be the underlying issue. Every single self-professed feminist (and some that wouldn't man* up and admit it too) I've met was bat**** and just not too happy with their female self. The proposed neutering of gender roles that have been established by hundreds of thousands of years of evolution with little but slogans and inflammatory rhetoric is... crazy.

 

*Oh I crack myself up

 

 

This is a difficult subject to explain why it is potentially so wrong. Both longevity and gender(biologically) should not be tinkered with without ages of thought going into the value determination and goals. People are already mongrels who are eating their children through overpopulating, over consumption and footing them a crippling bill though our debt and hubris, seriously if one thinks about it most of our activities and conventions are almost designed to deplete resources. Making decisions like this from within our current consumer paradigm would be like a whole new apex of irresponsibility towards future generations.

 

Also in terms of gender politics human hierarchy is entirely voluntary, fundamentally vices enable others and virtues uplift the self. The gender with the more members socialized and educated to self identify as victims will be the weaker in a social context... From the equality angle feminism is also a failure and a false front, the behavior Guard Dog refers to in a military environment tends to be typical. Rather than the previous masculine standard being extended towards the new females in the traditionally male positions, the standard itself is more often eroded. In this sense feminism in political and work environments seems to just be a push towards androgyny, and mediocrity.

 

An old standard is eroded, replaced with nothing really. Everyone is equally wonderful(useless) in a consumer opium den.