Transgender

[ShanDog]

Please be aware that the tolerance of anti-trans language on BF is at an all-time low. Jokes and insults that are trans-related, as well as anti-trans and bigoted rhetoric will be met with infractions, threadbans etc as required. It's a sensitive (and important) topic, so behave like well-mannered adults when discussing it, PARTICULARLY when disagreeing. This equally applies across the whole site.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Once upon a time it was fashionable for men to wear hats, and every handsome, wealthy man wore a fedora. Now if you wear a fedora you are considered a creepy incel. We should not confuse fashion trends for what's really going on. Signalling status or youth is eternal, the mechanism by which you choose to do it (and its success) varies.

Fashion is a societal construct, true?

 

[Snake_Baker]

I agree social construction exists but it clearly has links to biological sex.

Links?

Biological Sex is a driving force of social construction.

 

[Malifice]

I agree social construction exists but it clearly has links to biological sex.

I said as much here:

That's actually an argument I have some time for. There is an objective biological sex (replete with sexual selection, sexual diamorphism and other biological differences between the sexes). I've never refuted that.

That biological distinction clearly influences behaviour (biological sex). However how it expresses itself is socially constructed (gender roles).

Men and women are biologically different. But how (or even if) those differences are expressed, is totally socially constructed.

About 3 hours ago.

Just to break it down:

1. There are biological differences between the sexes (male and female).
2. Those biological differences influence behaviour.
3. How those differences are expressed is socially constructed, and further vary by context and individual.

 

[its free real estate]

Fashion is a societal construct, true?

Don't confuse the signal representation for the underlying meaning. Why was pink once a boy's colour (supposedly) - or more accurately, why did male dandies wear lace, velvet, and silk? Because these materials all signalled wealth and status. Nowadays with these materials all being mass produced, there is no status signalling value to them. Better to wear an understated, tailored Ermenegildo Zegna suit to show off your status.

 

[Malifice]

Don't confuse the signal representation for the underlying meaning. Why was pink once a boy's colour (supposedly) - or more accurately, why did male dandies wear lace, velvet, and silk? Because these materials all signalled wealth and status. Nowadays with these materials all being mass produced, there is no status signalling value to them.

So we all socially agreed that blokes shouldnt wear pink lace and velvet dresses anymore, because there was no power attached to them anymore.

Remind me again, who wears pink lace and velvet dresses now?

 

[its free real estate]

So we all socially agreed that blokes shouldnt wear pink lace and velvet dresses anymore, because there was no power attached to them anymore.

Remind me again, who wears pink lace and velvet dresses now?

Grandmas.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Fashion is a societal construct, true?

Societal or biological?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Don't confuse the signal representation for the underlying meaning. Why was pink once a boy's colour (supposedly) - or more accurately, why did male dandies wear lace, velvet, and silk? Because these materials all signalled wealth and status. Nowadays with these materials all being mass produced, there is no status signalling value to them.

Yeah, society moves on. Values it once assigned to certain material things fall out of use in favour of others. It might be fickle but this is true of almost everything we as a society have built for ourselves. We assign values to things that most in the animal world couldn't give two shits about.

It is our intellect that sets us apart.

 

[its free real estate]

Yeah, society moves on. Values it once assigned to certain material things fall out of use in favour of others. It might be fickle but this is true of almost everything we as a society have built for ourselves. We assign values to things that most in the animal world couldn't give two shits about.

It is our intellect that sets us apart.

But that doesn't mean there isn't an intrinsic concept of femininity, universal to all cultures, regardless of expression. Expression is essentially determined by the available materials, really. "Pink" wasn't a girls colour 200 years ago, because pink wasn't really a colour anyone could wear anyway. For most people it was a choice between blue and black.

Mauve was the first mass produced synthetic dye, and it wasn't invented until 1859.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Societal or biological?

View attachment 647011

The bra was invented to secure a female's breasts so that bit is biological. But lingerie as a style? Societal for sure. Ditto swimwear. I mean look at this

Biological or societal?

 

[Malifice]

Yeah, society moves on. Values it once assigned to certain material things fall out of use in favour of others.

Weirdly he notes this is the case, but denies it's socially constructed.

It's as if he views the value we socially place on an object (say the price of a car) as a fundamental property of that object.

Like; his position seems to be that if human beings were suddenly made extinct, an alien species that discovered that car would give it the same value.

The object only has value because we say it does. Not due to some kind of inherent quality of the object that exists independent of our social agreement as to that value.

 

[Snake_Baker]

The bra was invented to secure a female's breasts so that bit is biological. But lingerie as a style? Societal for sure. Ditto swimwear. I mean look at this

Biological or societal?

100% biological.

 

[its free real estate]

The bra was invented to secure a female's breasts so that bit is biological. But lingerie as a style? Societal for sure. Ditto swimwear. I mean look at this

Biological or societal?

Is that the Geelong Football Club circa 1901?

 

[Downhill Skier]

I said as much here:



About 3 hours ago.

Just to break it down:

1. There are biological differences between the sexes (male and female).
2. Those biological differences influence behaviour.
3. How those differences are expressed is socially constructed, and further vary by context and individual.

Point 1 and 2 I agree with 100%.

Point 3 I agree that some of those differences are expressed due to social construction but definitely will never agree that all are . If you are expressing yourself in certain ways because of personality traits biologically aligned to your gender I cannot fathom how it can be considered social construction .

 

[its free real estate]

Weirdly he notes this is the case, but denies it's socially constructed.

It's as if he views the value we socially place on an object (say the price of a car) as a fundamental property of that object.

Like; his position seems to be that if human beings were suddenly made extinct, an alien species that discovered that car would give it the same value.

The object only has value because we say it does. Not due to some kind of inherent quality of the object that exists independent of our social agreement as to that value.

No, I am saying that the qualities are not fundamental, and they don't need to be, they just need to be relative to each other.

 

[its free real estate]

Like; his position seems to be that if human beings were suddenly made extinct, an alien species that discovered that car would give it the same value.

It's sort of weird how archaelogists looking at Paleolithic grave sites can quickly tell whether a body is male or female simply based on what they are buried with. How do they do that if it is all constructed!

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

But that doesn't mean there isn't an intrinsic concept of femininity, universal to all cultures, regardless of expression. Expression is essentially determined by the available materials, really. "Pink" wasn't a girls colour 200 years ago, because pink wasn't really a colour anyone could wear anyway. For most people it was a choice between blue and black.

Mauve was the first mass produced synthetic dye, and it wasn't invented until 1859.

There are definite biological differences, but those differences were magnified out of all proportion in many ways. We created societal structures around biological difference. Heirarchies developed that shut women out.

Still to this day there is that perception that a bloke who roots around is a stud to be deified while a woman who roots around is a **** to be shamed. Why is that? It's a perception initially borne from biological difference, but our intellect magnified it into an artificial construct housing the 'female role' in society.

The seed was biological for sure. What grew after?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

100% biological.

How so?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Is that the Geelong Football Club circa 1901?

Ha! Yeah, it kinda looks like the old uniform but I found it via an image search for 'Victorian era swimwear'

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Victorian+era+swimwear&t=ffnt&iax=images&ia=images&iai=https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c0/ba/06/c0ba0687973a9d359191f22bde55f8ee.jpg

 

[Snake_Baker]

How so?

Flesh & curves.

The 1900's version of page 3 girls.

 

[its free real estate]

There are definite biological differences, but those differences were magnified out of all proportion in many ways. We created societal structures around biological difference. Heirarchies developed that shut women out.

Still to this day there is that perception that a bloke who roots around is a stud to be deified while a woman who roots around is a **** to be shamed. Why is that? It's a perception initially borne from biological difference, but our intellect magnified it into an artificial construct housing the 'female role' in society.

The seed was biological for sure. What grew after?

It grew in many ways. From 5,000 BCE:

While there were many elite burials uncovered, there was one in particular that stood out amongst the rest – grave 43. Inside grave 43, archaeologists uncovered the remains of a high status male who appears to have been a ruler/leader of some kind – more gold was found within this burial than in the entire rest of the world in that period. The male was buried with a scepter – a symbol of high rank or spiritual power – and wore a sheath of solid gold over his penis.​

https://www.ancient-origins.net/anc...and-wealthiest-grave-5th-millennium-bc-002798

A coupla weeks ago:

A billionaire diamond trader has died during a penis enlargement operation at a posh Parisian clinic, it was reported.​

​

Ehud Arye Laniado died at the age of 65 in the clinic of an unnamed plastic surgeon on the Avenue des Champs-Elysees in the French capital Paris.​

​

According to local media, complications during surgery proved fatal for the Belgian-Israeli dual national and he suffered a heart attack when a substance was injected into his penis.​

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/h...y/news-story/6837315b4146e2bfb9e2a6da21423340

It's just a social construct!

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Flesh & curves.

The 1900's version of page 3 girls.

That's fashion, as dictated by the social mores of the era. I do note the mens' swimwear ends above the knee and the womens' below it, but that's a societal impose on the two genders.

 

[Downhill Skier]

Links?

Biological Sex is a driving force of social construction.

I agree with that in essence but I believe some of what are considered gender norms are social constructs that have nothing to do with biological differences

 

[Snake_Baker]

That's fashion, as dictated by the social mores of the era. I do note the mens' swimwear ends above the knee and the womens' below it, but that's a societal impose on the two genders.

.............fashion, as dictated by the social mores of the era, with the intention of inducing sexual attraction (biology)

The underlying biology dictates that "fashion" within the social constraints of that period. The biology is the trigger.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

It grew in many ways. From 5,000 BCE:

While there were many elite burials uncovered, there was one in particular that stood out amongst the rest – grave 43. Inside grave 43, archaeologists uncovered the remains of a high status male who appears to have been a ruler/leader of some kind – more gold was found within this burial than in the entire rest of the world in that period. The male was buried with a scepter – a symbol of high rank or spiritual power – and wore a sheath of solid gold over his penis.​

https://www.ancient-origins.net/anc...and-wealthiest-grave-5th-millennium-bc-002798

A coupla weeks ago:

A billionaire diamond trader has died during a penis enlargement operation at a posh Parisian clinic, it was reported.​

Ehud Arye Laniado died at the age of 65 in the clinic of an unnamed plastic surgeon on the Avenue des Champs-Elysees in the French capital Paris.​

According to local media, complications during surgery proved fatal for the Belgian-Israeli dual national and he suffered a heart attack when a substance was injected into his penis.​

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/h...y/news-story/6837315b4146e2bfb9e2a6da21423340

It's just a social construct!

Phallic fetishisation is a thing. A thing brought on by societal exaggeration of male biology.