I'm revolutionizing my old Women's Studies Feminist Pop Culture Blog into my new space for reflecting on significant and non-significant issues I face/think about pretty much every day.
#1 I need someplace to be able to write this crap down and sort it out and make it somewhat logical
#2 I don't know a lot of people I can talk with about this stuff...so, I turn to the internet, obvi.
Here's my first installment of random crap:
Q: Jordan, What do you think about life?
A:I have a lot of theories on a lot of weird stuff. Most of this is theories I believe in and then ponder. Here's a glimpse into the messed up stuff I think about way more than I should. The conflation of sex and gender. Let's differentiate. Sex=biological=female/male. Gender=socially constructed=boy/man girl/woman. Why do our sex organs determine the boundaries of our everyday lives? Aka biological determinism. I believe that sex is fluid. Not everybody fits perfectly into the category of female or male. Some females have a Y chromosome in there…some have enlarged clits everyone has the same hormones just in different combinations. So why, when someone has a child with sex organs that appear on the outside to be female do we automatically exclaim "it's a girl"? What is it about a humans sex organs that determines my behavior or what I'll be interested in later in life? What makes me "woman". I believe that there is nothing inherently woman-like or man-like in any human being. I don't behave like a woman because it's my natural calling, I behave like a woman because that's how I'm supposed to behave, that's what is expected of me, that’s what I've "known" my whole life. And the only reason this is expected of me is because of what my genitalia looks like. "It's just what we do". Why are child bearers also child rearers? Why does my body determine my fate?
Class is a term mostly only associated with socioeconomic status. When, if fact, "class" is also used in relation to sex and race. (Sex Class/Race Class). As we are all aware, the color of peoples’ skin has historically been used to create inequality. That is to fabricate, to construe, to falsely attribute social characteristics to an individual based on the color of their skin. Like all black men are "sexual savages" right? Inequality is created in order for usually one, single group to BENEFIT from. Now we all know that this is a bunch of bs, that skin color has nothing to do with an individual, that the differences are merely cultural, that the world is not just black and white, and don't judge a book by it's cover.
So here's a "thought experiment"
Color of your skin = Biological ex. Black Savage =Constucted "all black people are savages"
Genetalia = Biological ex. Female Woman = Constucted "all females are women"
This comparison seems worlds apart but really WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE?
Both are based on biological traits. Both give "meaning" to these traits.
Both create inequality, both benefit a single dominant "group".
Why is it ok to play boys vs girls and not whites vs non-whites?
How come we can watch American idol girls night and American idol boys night? Why don’t we have black night and white night?
Now, I'm not telling you that there's no difference. But, I find this an extremely interesting idea to ponder. If I were to try to answer this question myself I would perhaps start along the lines of explaining that there is a purposeful relationship between the two sex organs: reproduction. Whereas different skin colors have no obvious purpose besides skin protection from the sun, which involves only the individual. But really, is this enough of a reason to create some weird phenomenon where you should be like this and I should be like this in order to gain some type of social power?
But, a class is a class. Even in the class we are all familiar with, socioeconomic status, inequality means very few people have lots of money and lots and lots of people have shit all. Capitalism is a tool used to create inequality, just like racism, just like sexism. We've gotten over the typical "poor people are lazy" and "black people are savages" discourses…but it seems as though gender relations have become so completely "naturalized" that it permeates every single facet of our lives. It has people thinking…"I'm more emotional and nurturing because I have a “vagina” or "I like to watch sports on tv" because I have a “penis”.
But Jordan, most males enjoy these typical male activities. They like them!
Lets examine this "enjoyment". Yes, I do believe men enjoy typical male activities like watching football. But what is it that they really enjoy? Is it watching the game itself? Or, is it perhaps the enjoyment of a feeling of validation one gets when properly fufiling the role they are supposed to. Because "I am doing a good job at being a man". Just like it feels good to be a great student, or to be the type of person anyone would be thrilled to employ. Essentially, you feel like you're good at life. I believe this is all subconscious though, as there is so much…I don't even know what…around gender performance that it is so naturalized, by which I mean repeated and repeated and repeated through history until it is considered to be natural. Not some natural anamalistic instinct. For example, to have sex. Anyway, I believe it all boils down to feeling good about yourself for correctly performing a role. A role designed for you by someone else. Now, can we please ask WHY we have to be so good at performing our gender roles to be considered "normal" in today's world?
Gender inequality benefits men, particulary white men. I believe that females could've easily created some type of system to benefit them as a group, it's just the luck of the draw or whatever. In order for men to continue to benefit, women need to be put in a position of a lesser power. How do we do this? Control her sexuality. Deny her access to resources. Make her survival depend on her relationship with men. Deem her the sole child rearer. Contain her in the private sphere. Create something called "private property", something that only a man can own. Create something called marriage: the only way a man can ensure that his children, are his children only and that they, and only they will inherit this property. Marriage also served to prevent women from obtaining property thereby essentially forcing her to be bound legally to a man. The "Family" unit benefits men more than it benefits women. So how did this happen? How did women fall for this? Because all these ugly truths were disguised through the use of discourses. "Women are naturally nurturing, women mature faster than men, women are naturally quiet, a woman's purpose is to please a man, having a child is a woman's ultimate purpose in life, women are emotional, women are more domestically inclined than men"…blah blah blah. Basically all a bunch of bs. Not rooted in any biological scientific proof existing merely to turn women into docile creatures too ashamed and too scared to reveal their true feelings and desires. One discourse we've extinguished is men are more intelligent than women. Only when women gained access to knowledge, and there were ways created to test this knowledge, was this proven. How can we prove that women aren't more nurturing than men? Allow men to be nurturing and then design some kind of test. But this would mean that men would have to take on a feminine characteristic, to essentially "give up" some of their superior power…and then develop a test. As you can see, there are reasons why some discourses exist and some have been revealed. But whether or not one is or isn't has zero bearing on its validity. Women marry so that they can have financial security. This is where you get the whole "wives are prostitutes" thing. Because in exchange for security, a woman must put out. Marriage has been the only way for women to reap any of the benefits that men attain under patriarchy. yet by marrying, women are participating and perpetuating patriarchy, Instead of being a legal binding, marriage has been masked as love, commitment, soul mates, eternal bliss. When we all know this is not the case. No document saying that I am "married" ensures anything except that I'll probably own my husbands property or possessions when he dies. Here's another good idea to keep women docile. Obsess them with insignificant things! Like, in order to have access to resources you have to get a husbandand in order to even get a husband you have to be beauutifffull so you should probably spend all your time and extra money on beauty. It's a woman's job after all. Dontcha know now.
Anyway keep in mind that I'm talking historically here. I understand that "things have changed". But I have to understand why I do or am expected to do these things so it's important to look at the initial purpose after revealing all the layers. Yes things have changed…so why do we still feel we need to have a day where we get married in order to certify love? After thinking about it, I don't. I can own my own private property. I tell people I'm never getting married. And I'm not. But this is mistakenly interpreted as I never want to be committed to someone. This is not the case. Marriage definitely does not assure this. If I find someone I want to be with, I will be with them for as long as it works, and nothing can determine or ensure the duration of that.
Here's my real theory on gender and sex and heterosexuality and homosexuality and trans.
I think there are a bunch of animals called humans and some of them have eggs and some of them have sperm so they once in a whle have to engage in a sex act with someone who has the opposite anatomy in order to reproduce their species. And thattts about as far as that goes.
I believe that no human is innately hetero or homosexual, woman or man, feminine or masculine. I belive that through very elaborate naturalized socialization we are assigned a gender and sexual orientation. In our case, male-man female-woman and straight. If we were told the opposite, I believe we would be living that way. I think we are easily molded into whatever we are told to be from birth. This is why most people are comfortable with their gender and sexual orientation. But what about the people who aren't? the GLBT community. I think sexual orientation works on a continuum. From super straight to super gay. Most people are probably in the middle I think. Have sex with whoever because it rules. The people who are super straight just blend in because their preference is the "right" one. Then the super gay people for lack of a better term are the ones who are conflicted here. It is not as easy for these people to just go along with being straight. But really, these people are the people with the strongest sexual identities. Most straight peoples sexuality is likely very fluid. So I don't think the majority of straight people are truly super straight or that people are straight because that’s how we're supposed to be, I think people just don't have that big of a problem conforming to heterosexuality. As for gender, I feel pretty much the same way, that gender is fluid and we kinda just take what we're given and go with it. If someone raised me as a dude I would likely enjoy dude things and act like a dude. I believe the trans community are individuals who cannot easily adapt to the gender assigned to them and therefore find the opposite or a combination of genders more comfortable. Now I really don't have a lot of insight to the trans community and don't intend to make any judgements on anyones personal feelings about their sexuality, I really don't know how you feel so no need to remind me of that. I think transexuals are a little harder to figure out. I could ponder that like transgender individuals they feel uncomfortable with their gender yet wish to also change their anatomy perhaps because of how conflated gender and sex are. If this is the case, it’s a little bit messed up to think that someone can feel so wrong about what they are supposed to be that they feel the need to change their body. When, without gender, a person can have the sex organs they were born with minus the life already laid out for them.
Gender is fabricated Gender is false. Yet, I enjoy being a woman, I don't have any desires to be otherwise. But then I realized, its not so much that I like being a girl as I like what being a girl permits me to do. I could very well enjoy being a man but I havent even traveled down any of those other paths to really know. I think of gender as restrictive. Imagine a human being with lots of different "pathways" to take. Then imagine a roadblock infront of half of those pathways. How unfortunate is it to limit one person's potential because of gender. What am I missing out on by not exploring these other parts of myself that I don’t even know exist, or how to access because they havent been made real to me, as in its something im not. There is so much discrimination based on gender rather than ability. Yet gender and ability are almost the same thing because we are only able to do what our gender allows.
Time for a break
Monday, May 14, 2007
I'm revolutionizing my old Women's Studies Feminist Pop Culture Blog into my new space for reflecting on significant and non-significant issues I face/think about pretty much every day.
#1 I need someplace to be able to write this crap down and sort it out and make it somewhat logical
#2 I don't know a lot of people I can talk with about this stuff...so, I turn to the internet, obvi.
Here's my first installment of random crap:
Q: Jordan, What do you think about life?
A:I have a lot of theories on a lot of weird stuff. Most of this is theories I believe in and then ponder. Here's a glimpse into the messed up stuff I think about way more than I should. The conflation of sex and gender. Let's differentiate. Sex=biological=female/male. Gender=socially constructed=boy/man girl/woman. Why do our sex organs determine the boundaries of our everyday lives? Aka biological determinism. I believe that sex is fluid. Not everybody fits perfectly into the category of female or male. Some females have a Y chromosome in there…some have enlarged clits everyone has the same hormones just in different combinations. So why, when someone has a child with sex organs that appear on the outside to be female do we automatically exclaim "it's a girl"? What is it about a humans sex organs that determines my behavior or what I'll be interested in later in life? What makes me "woman". I believe that there is nothing inherently woman-like or man-like in any human being. I don't behave like a woman because it's my natural calling, I behave like a woman because that's how I'm supposed to behave, that's what is expected of me, that’s what I've "known" my whole life. And the only reason this is expected of me is because of what my genitalia looks like. "It's just what we do". Why are child bearers also child rearers? Why does my body determine my fate?
Class is a term mostly only associated with socioeconomic status. When, if fact, "class" is also used in relation to sex and race. (Sex Class/Race Class). As we are all aware, the color of peoples’ skin has historically been used to create inequality. That is to fabricate, to construe, to falsely attribute social characteristics to an individual based on the color of their skin. Like all black men are "sexual savages" right? Inequality is created in order for usually one, single group to BENEFIT from. Now we all know that this is a bunch of bs, that skin color has nothing to do with an individual, that the differences are merely cultural, that the world is not just black and white, and don't judge a book by it's cover.
So here's a "thought experiment"
Color of your skin = Biological ex. Black Savage =Constucted "all black people are savages"
Genetalia = Biological ex. Female Woman = Constucted "all females are women"
This comparison seems worlds apart but really WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE?
Both are based on biological traits. Both give "meaning" to these traits.
Both create inequality, both benefit a single dominant "group".
Why is it ok to play boys vs girls and not whites vs non-whites?
How come we can watch American idol girls night and American idol boys night? Why don’t we have black night and white night?
Now, I'm not telling you that there's no difference. But, I find this an extremely interesting idea to ponder. If I were to try to answer this question myself I would perhaps start along the lines of explaining that there is a purposeful relationship between the two sex organs: reproduction. Whereas different skin colors have no obvious purpose besides skin protection from the sun, which involves only the individual. But really, is this enough of a reason to create some weird phenomenon where you should be like this and I should be like this in order to gain some type of social power?
But, a class is a class. Even in the class we are all familiar with, socioeconomic status, inequality means very few people have lots of money and lots and lots of people have shit all. Capitalism is a tool used to create inequality, just like racism, just like sexism. We've gotten over the typical "poor people are lazy" and "black people are savages" discourses…but it seems as though gender relations have become so completely "naturalized" that it permeates every single facet of our lives. It has people thinking…"I'm more emotional and nurturing because I have a “vagina” or "I like to watch sports on tv" because I have a “penis”.
But Jordan, most males enjoy these typical male activities. They like them!
Lets examine this "enjoyment". Yes, I do believe men enjoy typical male activities like watching football. But what is it that they really enjoy? Is it watching the game itself? Or, is it perhaps the enjoyment of a feeling of validation one gets when properly fufiling the role they are supposed to. Because "I am doing a good job at being a man". Just like it feels good to be a great student, or to be the type of person anyone would be thrilled to employ. Essentially, you feel like you're good at life. I believe this is all subconscious though, as there is so much…I don't even know what…around gender performance that it is so naturalized, by which I mean repeated and repeated and repeated through history until it is considered to be natural. Not some natural anamalistic instinct. For example, to have sex. Anyway, I believe it all boils down to feeling good about yourself for correctly performing a role. A role designed for you by someone else. Now, can we please ask WHY we have to be so good at performing our gender roles to be considered "normal" in today's world?
Gender inequality benefits men, particulary white men. I believe that females could've easily created some type of system to benefit them as a group, it's just the luck of the draw or whatever. In order for men to continue to benefit, women need to be put in a position of a lesser power. How do we do this? Control her sexuality. Deny her access to resources. Make her survival depend on her relationship with men. Deem her the sole child rearer. Contain her in the private sphere. Create something called "private property", something that only a man can own. Create something called marriage: the only way a man can ensure that his children, are his children only and that they, and only they will inherit this property. Marriage also served to prevent women from obtaining property thereby essentially forcing her to be bound legally to a man. The "Family" unit benefits men more than it benefits women. So how did this happen? How did women fall for this? Because all these ugly truths were disguised through the use of discourses. "Women are naturally nurturing, women mature faster than men, women are naturally quiet, a woman's purpose is to please a man, having a child is a woman's ultimate purpose in life, women are emotional, women are more domestically inclined than men"…blah blah blah. Basically all a bunch of bs. Not rooted in any biological scientific proof existing merely to turn women into docile creatures too ashamed and too scared to reveal their true feelings and desires. One discourse we've extinguished is men are more intelligent than women. Only when women gained access to knowledge, and there were ways created to test this knowledge, was this proven. How can we prove that women aren't more nurturing than men? Allow men to be nurturing and then design some kind of test. But this would mean that men would have to take on a feminine characteristic, to essentially "give up" some of their superior power…and then develop a test. As you can see, there are reasons why some discourses exist and some have been revealed. But whether or not one is or isn't has zero bearing on its validity. Women marry so that they can have financial security. This is where you get the whole "wives are prostitutes" thing. Because in exchange for security, a woman must put out. Marriage has been the only way for women to reap any of the benefits that men attain under patriarchy. yet by marrying, women are participating and perpetuating patriarchy, Instead of being a legal binding, marriage has been masked as love, commitment, soul mates, eternal bliss. When we all know this is not the case. No document saying that I am "married" ensures anything except that I'll probably own my husbands property or possessions when he dies. Here's another good idea to keep women docile. Obsess them with insignificant things! Like, in order to have access to resources you have to get a husbandand in order to even get a husband you have to be beauutifffull so you should probably spend all your time and extra money on beauty. It's a woman's job after all. Dontcha know now.
Anyway keep in mind that I'm talking historically here. I understand that "things have changed". But I have to understand why I do or am expected to do these things so it's important to look at the initial purpose after revealing all the layers. Yes things have changed…so why do we still feel we need to have a day where we get married in order to certify love? After thinking about it, I don't. I can own my own private property. I tell people I'm never getting married. And I'm not. But this is mistakenly interpreted as I never want to be committed to someone. This is not the case. Marriage definitely does not assure this. If I find someone I want to be with, I will be with them for as long as it works, and nothing can determine or ensure the duration of that.
Here's my real theory on gender and sex and heterosexuality and homosexuality and trans.
I think there are a bunch of animals called humans and some of them have eggs and some of them have sperm so they once in a whle have to engage in a sex act with someone who has the opposite anatomy in order to reproduce their species. And thattts about as far as that goes.
I believe that no human is innately hetero or homosexual, woman or man, feminine or masculine. I belive that through very elaborate naturalized socialization we are assigned a gender and sexual orientation. In our case, male-man female-woman and straight. If we were told the opposite, I believe we would be living that way. I think we are easily molded into whatever we are told to be from birth. This is why most people are comfortable with their gender and sexual orientation. But what about the people who aren't? the GLBT community. I think sexual orientation works on a continuum. From super straight to super gay. Most people are probably in the middle I think. Have sex with whoever because it rules. The people who are super straight just blend in because their preference is the "right" one. Then the super gay people for lack of a better term are the ones who are conflicted here. It is not as easy for these people to just go along with being straight. But really, these people are the people with the strongest sexual identities. Most straight peoples sexuality is likely very fluid. So I don't think the majority of straight people are truly super straight or that people are straight because that’s how we're supposed to be, I think people just don't have that big of a problem conforming to heterosexuality. As for gender, I feel pretty much the same way, that gender is fluid and we kinda just take what we're given and go with it. If someone raised me as a dude I would likely enjoy dude things and act like a dude. I believe the trans community are individuals who cannot easily adapt to the gender assigned to them and therefore find the opposite or a combination of genders more comfortable. Now I really don't have a lot of insight to the trans community and don't intend to make any judgements on anyones personal feelings about their sexuality, I really don't know how you feel so no need to remind me of that. I think transexuals are a little harder to figure out. I could ponder that like transgender individuals they feel uncomfortable with their gender yet wish to also change their anatomy perhaps because of how conflated gender and sex are. If this is the case, it’s a little bit messed up to think that someone can feel so wrong about what they are supposed to be that they feel the need to change their body. When, without gender, a person can have the sex organs they were born with minus the life already laid out for them.
Gender is fabricated Gender is false. Yet, I enjoy being a woman, I don't have any desires to be otherwise. But then I realized, its not so much that I like being a girl as I like what being a girl permits me to do. I could very well enjoy being a man but I havent even traveled down any of those other paths to really know. I think of gender as restrictive. Imagine a human being with lots of different "pathways" to take. Then imagine a roadblock infront of half of those pathways. How unfortunate is it to limit one person's potential because of gender. What am I missing out on by not exploring these other parts of myself that I don’t even know exist, or how to access because they havent been made real to me, as in its something im not. There is so much discrimination based on gender rather than ability. Yet gender and ability are almost the same thing because we are only able to do what our gender allows.
Time for a break
#1 I need someplace to be able to write this crap down and sort it out and make it somewhat logical
#2 I don't know a lot of people I can talk with about this stuff...so, I turn to the internet, obvi.
Here's my first installment of random crap:
Q: Jordan, What do you think about life?
A:I have a lot of theories on a lot of weird stuff. Most of this is theories I believe in and then ponder. Here's a glimpse into the messed up stuff I think about way more than I should. The conflation of sex and gender. Let's differentiate. Sex=biological=female/male. Gender=socially constructed=boy/man girl/woman. Why do our sex organs determine the boundaries of our everyday lives? Aka biological determinism. I believe that sex is fluid. Not everybody fits perfectly into the category of female or male. Some females have a Y chromosome in there…some have enlarged clits everyone has the same hormones just in different combinations. So why, when someone has a child with sex organs that appear on the outside to be female do we automatically exclaim "it's a girl"? What is it about a humans sex organs that determines my behavior or what I'll be interested in later in life? What makes me "woman". I believe that there is nothing inherently woman-like or man-like in any human being. I don't behave like a woman because it's my natural calling, I behave like a woman because that's how I'm supposed to behave, that's what is expected of me, that’s what I've "known" my whole life. And the only reason this is expected of me is because of what my genitalia looks like. "It's just what we do". Why are child bearers also child rearers? Why does my body determine my fate?
Class is a term mostly only associated with socioeconomic status. When, if fact, "class" is also used in relation to sex and race. (Sex Class/Race Class). As we are all aware, the color of peoples’ skin has historically been used to create inequality. That is to fabricate, to construe, to falsely attribute social characteristics to an individual based on the color of their skin. Like all black men are "sexual savages" right? Inequality is created in order for usually one, single group to BENEFIT from. Now we all know that this is a bunch of bs, that skin color has nothing to do with an individual, that the differences are merely cultural, that the world is not just black and white, and don't judge a book by it's cover.
So here's a "thought experiment"
Color of your skin = Biological ex. Black Savage =Constucted "all black people are savages"
Genetalia = Biological ex. Female Woman = Constucted "all females are women"
This comparison seems worlds apart but really WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE?
Both are based on biological traits. Both give "meaning" to these traits.
Both create inequality, both benefit a single dominant "group".
Why is it ok to play boys vs girls and not whites vs non-whites?
How come we can watch American idol girls night and American idol boys night? Why don’t we have black night and white night?
Now, I'm not telling you that there's no difference. But, I find this an extremely interesting idea to ponder. If I were to try to answer this question myself I would perhaps start along the lines of explaining that there is a purposeful relationship between the two sex organs: reproduction. Whereas different skin colors have no obvious purpose besides skin protection from the sun, which involves only the individual. But really, is this enough of a reason to create some weird phenomenon where you should be like this and I should be like this in order to gain some type of social power?
But, a class is a class. Even in the class we are all familiar with, socioeconomic status, inequality means very few people have lots of money and lots and lots of people have shit all. Capitalism is a tool used to create inequality, just like racism, just like sexism. We've gotten over the typical "poor people are lazy" and "black people are savages" discourses…but it seems as though gender relations have become so completely "naturalized" that it permeates every single facet of our lives. It has people thinking…"I'm more emotional and nurturing because I have a “vagina” or "I like to watch sports on tv" because I have a “penis”.
But Jordan, most males enjoy these typical male activities. They like them!
Lets examine this "enjoyment". Yes, I do believe men enjoy typical male activities like watching football. But what is it that they really enjoy? Is it watching the game itself? Or, is it perhaps the enjoyment of a feeling of validation one gets when properly fufiling the role they are supposed to. Because "I am doing a good job at being a man". Just like it feels good to be a great student, or to be the type of person anyone would be thrilled to employ. Essentially, you feel like you're good at life. I believe this is all subconscious though, as there is so much…I don't even know what…around gender performance that it is so naturalized, by which I mean repeated and repeated and repeated through history until it is considered to be natural. Not some natural anamalistic instinct. For example, to have sex. Anyway, I believe it all boils down to feeling good about yourself for correctly performing a role. A role designed for you by someone else. Now, can we please ask WHY we have to be so good at performing our gender roles to be considered "normal" in today's world?
Gender inequality benefits men, particulary white men. I believe that females could've easily created some type of system to benefit them as a group, it's just the luck of the draw or whatever. In order for men to continue to benefit, women need to be put in a position of a lesser power. How do we do this? Control her sexuality. Deny her access to resources. Make her survival depend on her relationship with men. Deem her the sole child rearer. Contain her in the private sphere. Create something called "private property", something that only a man can own. Create something called marriage: the only way a man can ensure that his children, are his children only and that they, and only they will inherit this property. Marriage also served to prevent women from obtaining property thereby essentially forcing her to be bound legally to a man. The "Family" unit benefits men more than it benefits women. So how did this happen? How did women fall for this? Because all these ugly truths were disguised through the use of discourses. "Women are naturally nurturing, women mature faster than men, women are naturally quiet, a woman's purpose is to please a man, having a child is a woman's ultimate purpose in life, women are emotional, women are more domestically inclined than men"…blah blah blah. Basically all a bunch of bs. Not rooted in any biological scientific proof existing merely to turn women into docile creatures too ashamed and too scared to reveal their true feelings and desires. One discourse we've extinguished is men are more intelligent than women. Only when women gained access to knowledge, and there were ways created to test this knowledge, was this proven. How can we prove that women aren't more nurturing than men? Allow men to be nurturing and then design some kind of test. But this would mean that men would have to take on a feminine characteristic, to essentially "give up" some of their superior power…and then develop a test. As you can see, there are reasons why some discourses exist and some have been revealed. But whether or not one is or isn't has zero bearing on its validity. Women marry so that they can have financial security. This is where you get the whole "wives are prostitutes" thing. Because in exchange for security, a woman must put out. Marriage has been the only way for women to reap any of the benefits that men attain under patriarchy. yet by marrying, women are participating and perpetuating patriarchy, Instead of being a legal binding, marriage has been masked as love, commitment, soul mates, eternal bliss. When we all know this is not the case. No document saying that I am "married" ensures anything except that I'll probably own my husbands property or possessions when he dies. Here's another good idea to keep women docile. Obsess them with insignificant things! Like, in order to have access to resources you have to get a husbandand in order to even get a husband you have to be beauutifffull so you should probably spend all your time and extra money on beauty. It's a woman's job after all. Dontcha know now.
Anyway keep in mind that I'm talking historically here. I understand that "things have changed". But I have to understand why I do or am expected to do these things so it's important to look at the initial purpose after revealing all the layers. Yes things have changed…so why do we still feel we need to have a day where we get married in order to certify love? After thinking about it, I don't. I can own my own private property. I tell people I'm never getting married. And I'm not. But this is mistakenly interpreted as I never want to be committed to someone. This is not the case. Marriage definitely does not assure this. If I find someone I want to be with, I will be with them for as long as it works, and nothing can determine or ensure the duration of that.
Here's my real theory on gender and sex and heterosexuality and homosexuality and trans.
I think there are a bunch of animals called humans and some of them have eggs and some of them have sperm so they once in a whle have to engage in a sex act with someone who has the opposite anatomy in order to reproduce their species. And thattts about as far as that goes.
I believe that no human is innately hetero or homosexual, woman or man, feminine or masculine. I belive that through very elaborate naturalized socialization we are assigned a gender and sexual orientation. In our case, male-man female-woman and straight. If we were told the opposite, I believe we would be living that way. I think we are easily molded into whatever we are told to be from birth. This is why most people are comfortable with their gender and sexual orientation. But what about the people who aren't? the GLBT community. I think sexual orientation works on a continuum. From super straight to super gay. Most people are probably in the middle I think. Have sex with whoever because it rules. The people who are super straight just blend in because their preference is the "right" one. Then the super gay people for lack of a better term are the ones who are conflicted here. It is not as easy for these people to just go along with being straight. But really, these people are the people with the strongest sexual identities. Most straight peoples sexuality is likely very fluid. So I don't think the majority of straight people are truly super straight or that people are straight because that’s how we're supposed to be, I think people just don't have that big of a problem conforming to heterosexuality. As for gender, I feel pretty much the same way, that gender is fluid and we kinda just take what we're given and go with it. If someone raised me as a dude I would likely enjoy dude things and act like a dude. I believe the trans community are individuals who cannot easily adapt to the gender assigned to them and therefore find the opposite or a combination of genders more comfortable. Now I really don't have a lot of insight to the trans community and don't intend to make any judgements on anyones personal feelings about their sexuality, I really don't know how you feel so no need to remind me of that. I think transexuals are a little harder to figure out. I could ponder that like transgender individuals they feel uncomfortable with their gender yet wish to also change their anatomy perhaps because of how conflated gender and sex are. If this is the case, it’s a little bit messed up to think that someone can feel so wrong about what they are supposed to be that they feel the need to change their body. When, without gender, a person can have the sex organs they were born with minus the life already laid out for them.
Gender is fabricated Gender is false. Yet, I enjoy being a woman, I don't have any desires to be otherwise. But then I realized, its not so much that I like being a girl as I like what being a girl permits me to do. I could very well enjoy being a man but I havent even traveled down any of those other paths to really know. I think of gender as restrictive. Imagine a human being with lots of different "pathways" to take. Then imagine a roadblock infront of half of those pathways. How unfortunate is it to limit one person's potential because of gender. What am I missing out on by not exploring these other parts of myself that I don’t even know exist, or how to access because they havent been made real to me, as in its something im not. There is so much discrimination based on gender rather than ability. Yet gender and ability are almost the same thing because we are only able to do what our gender allows.
Time for a break
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
