this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2024
714 points (96.5% liked)

196

16233 readers
1779 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 22 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Somebody has a gender you don't understand. Tough

Also

Somebody doesn't understand your gender. Tough.

[–] Tinks@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

While I agree with your sentiment, there is a difference between not understanding and actively disparaging. The former is fine - there's plenty of stuff I don't understand, and I just don't comment on it because I have no business doing so. Where I take objection is when the lack of understanding transforms into bigotry and disparaging remarks.

By all means be ignorant (and I don't mean that in a derogatory manner - we are all ignorant about various things), but don't let your ignorance manifest into negativity.

Agreed.

Don't understand. Fine.

Assumptions, deliberate misunderstandings and misrepresentations. Not fine.

[–] Track_Shovel 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Nothing a discussion can't clarify.

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

You're missing their point, I think, which I believe is essentially "a disparity between how you perceive yourself and how I perceive you does not inherently constitute an injustice on my part".

[–] key@lemmy.keychat.org 39 points 6 days ago

France is a lie schemed up by the British monarchy in the 1400s to reinforce traditional power structures via a common enemy.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 38 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

I want to understand tho. Like, yeah I don't need to, to not be an asshole; but I still want to understand everything I don't. I'm curious like that.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 1 points 2 days ago

I think that's the sign of a good person

If you build a world for good persons, it'll collapse in your lifetime.

Good persons want to understand each other. People don't - they want to think as little as possible above all else

[–] randomname01@feddit.nl 28 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Also, because gender is a social construct, it requires that enough people understand it to a sufficient degree.

[–] zea_64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Gender's an overloaded term. Are you talking about the internal feeling, the way someone's treated by others, the shared sense of a variable that differentiates people, social institutions, ideas, or something else?

Those of course are all related very strongly, but they're not the same thing. Different models of gender will define of differently, but that's usually just to best fit the area they're applicable to. If a philosopher tells you gender is a social construct, that's because they're analyzing things through the lens of social construction. Very useful, but merely one perspective.

[–] randomname01@feddit.nl 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I mean, I guess there’s a point to that, but isn’t there inevitably a social aspect to it? Especially in this post, where the person is saying others don’t have to understand it, meaning it’s clearly outwardly visible and part of who they are.

I’m not saying you should seek approval from anyone (for your gender nor anything else), because that’ll never happen. But denying the importance of some social acceptance for things in the social sphere is kind of weird, and feels like a “haha, unless…?” thing; you want others to understand and accept it, but the moment you don’t their acceptance becomes irrelevant and you never sought any acceptance at all. It feels like an unhealthy way to cope with rejection.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] manny_stillwagon@mander.xyz 12 points 6 days ago (1 children)

As opposed to French, which famously exists as a natural truth of the universe. Even if we had never discovered French it would still be there... waiting.

[–] randomname01@feddit.nl 11 points 6 days ago

I think the language analogy is actually very apt, because not every has to understand it, but the people you want to speak French with necessarily have to know it. Otherwise it just doesn’t fulfil any purpose.

[–] NegativeLookBehind@lemmy.world 33 points 6 days ago

France isn’t real!

[–] kwomp2@sh.itjust.works 19 points 6 days ago (3 children)

This is a week analogy.. french only works as a means of communication because it has internal rules that are objective (as in different people understand the same/very similar thing when hearing/seeing a symbol/word).

Singularity of experience is cool, but anything social requires communication/synchronization.

Even though gender is used as a box or definition people are forced to fit into (and this is bad), reducing human experience to a blackbox kind of singularity is a highly individualist take.

You can work on understanding each other without forcing anyone to fit into your definition..

[–] Excrubulent 20 points 6 days ago (4 children)

Language isn't objective though. It wasn't handed down from some deity.

Language is a constantly evolving negotiation of new and remixed communications, performed through billions of interactions every single day. It's collaborative and unpredictable and sometimes someone comes up with something cool and the next day everybody is copying them.

In short, language is socially constructed.

I think it's a great analogy for gender in that respect.

[–] kwomp2@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Objective and socially constructed isn't a 'hard' contradiction.

Yes of course language evolves and so on, but in a given time(period) it needs to be interpretable more or less independently from the specific actor (a dictionary ensures this, even though it needs to be updated regularly).

In other words yeah sometimes language comes up with new stuff. If it would do it all the time, it wouldn't function

[–] Excrubulent 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

It does change all the time, and dictionaries don't ensure any kind of standard. The linguists who write dictionaries will tell you that their only function is to describe the most popular parts of the language, not to prescribe any particular rules. Telling people how they should speak doesn't actually work.

I could say the phrase "abso-fucking-lutely" and you understand it, even though it's not in the dictionary. That's still language, it's still English.

And I don't know what you mean by a "'hard' contradiction" or why that matters. My point is that both language and gender are forms of communication that rely on socially constructed signifiers and they are both fluid to a similar degree, so the analogy is good. If you want to argue with me, that's the point you should be dealing with.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] will_steal_your_username@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

language is objective

no

People don't agree what sentences and words mean all the time. Every single linguist on earth disagrees with you

[–] kwomp2@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 days ago
[–] LordKitsuna@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

The analogy probably gets used for longer than just one week

[–] tfw_no_toiletpaper@lemmy.world 18 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Thanks I am going to harass French people now

It's hard they don't care what you or anyone else thinks

[–] starlord@lemm.ee 18 points 6 days ago
[–] morgunkorn@discuss.tchncs.de 20 points 6 days ago (1 children)

And in French everything has a gender: a table? Definitely a she. A coat hanger? Looks like a he to me. A car? Look at those curves, she it is. That truck though, totally masculine. But the trailer behind it, still a she.

[–] sneezycat@sopuli.xyz 7 points 6 days ago (3 children)

The funny thing with gendered languages is that synonyms can have different genders. So "el pollo" and "la gallina" both mean "chicken", but their grammatical gender differs.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago

And in Germany, a girl is genderless until she grows up 😄

[–] morgunkorn@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 6 days ago

yeah really interesting in this case both come from Latin, and both made their way in the modern languages, one in its masculine form the other in its feminine form.

  • Pullus (adj.) very small (animal), a young rooster, "pulla" for the female chicken. French : la poule
  • Gallus (name) rooster, "gallina" for the female chicken. French : le gallinacé (a chicken specimen, member of the species Gallus domestica)
[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

This is a good place for that reminder that the big lexicon of sexualities, romantic orientations and gender identities are something to help you figure out what your business is. Other people will sometimes have identities that do not appear to match their behavior, and that is fine.

This was the whole point of Russell T. Davies television series Bob & Rose (Bob is gay man who falls in love with Rose, a straight woman, and everybody freaks the fuck out. )

Or to put it another way, if a friend of yours is a lesbian but sometimes likes the d, or has a d or is enby, id est, not a woman, they are still a lesbian.

Most of the lesbian community is down with this, in my experience, but the lesbian community -- and the LGBT+ community in general -- has a long history of gatekeeping, especially of shutting out bi folk and trans folk. And we need peers, friends and allies on the same page. So here we are with the bus driver tapping the sign.

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

If a straight man sometimes like the d, are they still a straight? Obligatory Asking for a friend.

Regardless of the answer, I'm not going to police someone on their identity.

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 5 days ago

If a guy likes the d but identifies as straight, then yes, he's straight.

If a guy likes the d (and less so the v) but also musicals and brunching and still identifies as straight, then he's straight.

At very least, the closet continues to be a necessity for some folk in intolerant circumstances.

Identity is something one works out for themselves. Heck the Kinsey scale implies almost everyone should be bi, (even if not very bi) and yet our booleanist society seems to want to categorize only Kinsey-0 as straight (with everyone else as Oh-So-Gay).

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago

Okay but you don't get to tell others what they need to think and feel about your experience.

[–] not_a_dog@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

Nah, forget about trying to reason with them. They'll just respond with "I honestly don't care, I just don't like it being shoved down my throat all the time!", even though it isn't actually being 'shoved down their throat', but you can't reason them out of a subjective delusion like that.

[–] MrMobius@sh.itjust.works 8 points 6 days ago

Respecte mon genre !

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

My gender is so difficult to comprehend for cis people that I just call myself a women so I dont confuse them

[–] NullNet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Cis people are missing out!! The more complicated the gender the more awesome you are!!

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Im a demigirl, the other part fluxuates between agender/pangender while simultaneously is genderfluid (transfem + demigirl + genderfluid + genderflux) :3

[–] pixeltree@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'm just mystified how you know yourself that well, sitting here in my puddle of self doubt

Trust me, as much as I know theres a lot I still dont. I have no idea why the other half fluxuates and I cant explain or comprehend what it fluxuates between. Sometimes its standard masculine and feminine but sometimes I just want to not have a physical form and just be a concept.

[–] Track_Shovel 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

After some googling two things happened:

  1. I kind of understand your gender(s)? Maybe?

  2. I learned some concepts about gender that I was very unaware of.

A great way to understand it is im part girl part everything else

[–] booly@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 days ago

No, no, the bigots hate people who speak French too

load more comments
view more: next ›