Feminine male, masculine female.

[Revoltingest]

Bearing that in mind, hey @Revoltingest what does 'girly' and 'butch' mean to you?

"Girly" (in the context of guys) reminds me of dancers I've known....more tightly fitting latest fashion clothing, well coiffed short hair, lilting voice, non-macho.
"Butch" makes me think of some lesbians I've known....men's clothing, short hair, no makeup, not girly.

Note to non-digital (ie, those prone to misinterpretation) posters:
These are not criticisms.
Just valueless observations.

 

[Akivah]

I mentioned in another post but one of the inspirations for this thread is a trans woman who describes herself as not super effeminate, and didn't like dresses and makeup. So it was super cool to talk with her about challenging this cultural preconception that female identity =/= femininity > masculinity.

So you want one person to up-end cultural norms?? It is far more likely that this one person is outside of the norms and she is the one that should be challenged.

 

[Sunstone]

I mentioned in another post but one of the inspirations for this thread is a trans woman who describes herself as not super effeminate, and didn't like dresses and makeup. So it was super cool to talk with her about challenging this cultural preconception that female identity =/= femininity > masculinity.

I think there are several ways in which it is suspect -- even ridiculous -- to conform ourselves to social stereotypes of what is masculine and feminine. Such things are largely arbitrary anyway. To blindly conform oneself to them is to unnecessarily limit the range of ones adaptive behaviors.

At the same time, I think it is nearly certain that masculinity and femininity have some sort of genetic component to them. It might sound paradoxical to believe that concepts of masculinity and femininity are both largely arbitrary and to some significant extent genetically based, but the paradox is solved when one looks into the details.

Take as an example something that clearly must be rooted in human instinct and therefore have a genetic basis of some sort: Tool use. There is not a culture on earth that doesn't make extensive use of tools of some sort or another. For that and other reasons, it is almost certain the predisposition to use tools, the instinct to use things as tools, must be genetically based.

Yet does that mean that any specific tool or kind of tool is hardwired into our genes? Of course not. With the possible exception of a basic hammer or hammer-like tool, and maybe a spear of some sort, few if any of our tools seem even in the least hardwired into us. There is no gene or genes that predispose us to create saws, for instance, no internal template for them.

In much the same manner, I believe it likely that some sort of predisposition or instinct for masculinity and some sort of predisposition or instinct for femininity might also be hardwired into us -- even if that hard wiring amounts to little more in practice than a marked, an ingrained and pronounced tendency to see the sexes as defined in contrasting comparison to each other, or some other such nebulous thing. Yet at the same time, how we choose to define those predispositions might be quite largely or wholly arbitrary matters, near entirely cultural and individual matters.

Where it gets complex for me is in the fact that so many of us show both masculine and feminine traits. But perhaps that is easily explained. If it really is true that how we define masculinity and femininity is largely or entirely cultural and individual, then why shouldn't we expect there to be people who possess both sets of traits? It would only be truly problematic if there were no such individuals and yet everything was still more or less culturally and individually defined.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

So you want one person to up-end cultural norms?? It is far more likely that this one person is outside of the norms and she is the one that should be challenged.

I think she's upending cultural norms wether I want it or not just by being who she is. Whether it 'should be' to me is about as inapplicable as whether women 'should be' engineers or gamers because that used to be not the norm. I strongly reject assumed gender expectations or roles. Meeting this woman just made me realize that should, for me, include transgendered people too.

 

[Sunstone]

So you want one person to up-end cultural norms?? It is far more likely that this one person is outside of the norms and she is the one that should be challenged.

I don't quite understand the notion that one person's challenging cultural norms means they want everyone to be like them. Maybe they do, but maybe they don't. Does my challenging X notion about masculinity inevitably mean I want everyone to give up accepting X notion of masculinity for them? Or is it more likely to be the case that I want people free to choose whether or not X notion of masculinity is for them? What do you think?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I think there are several ways in which it is suspect -- even ridiculous -- to conform ourselves to social stereotypes of what is masculine and feminine. Such things are largely arbitrary anyway. To blindly conform oneself to them is to unnecessarily limit the range of ones adaptive behaviors.

At the same time, I think it is nearly certain that masculinity and femininity have some sort of genetic component to them. It might sound paradoxical to believe that concepts of masculinity and femininity are both largely arbitrary and to some significant extent genetically based, but the paradox is solved when one looks into the details.

Take as an example something that clearly must be rooted in human instinct and therefore have a genetic basis of some sort: Tool use. There is not a culture on earth that doesn't make extensive use of tools of some sort or another. For that and other reasons, it is almost certain the predisposition to use tools, the instinct to use things as tools, must be genetically based.

Yet does that mean that any specific tool or kind of tool is hardwired into our genes? Of course not. With the possible exception of a basic hammer or hammer-like tool, and maybe a spear of some sort, few if any of our tools seem even in the least hardwired into us. There is no gene or genes that predispose us to create saws, for instance, no internal template for them.

In much the same manner, I believe it likely that some sort of predisposition or instinct for masculinity and some sort of predisposition or instinct for femininity might also be hardwired into us -- even if that hard wiring amounts to little more in practice than a marked, an ingrained and pronounced tendency to see the sexes as defined in contrasting comparison to each other, or some other such nebulous thing. Yet at the same time, how we choose to define those predispositions might be quite largely or wholly arbitrary matters, near entirely cultural and individual matters.

Where it gets complex for me is in the fact that so many of us show both masculine and feminine traits. But perhaps that is easily explained. If it really is true that how we define masculinity and femininity is largely or entirely cultural and individual, then why shouldn't we expect there to be people who possess both sets of traits? It would only be truly problematic if there were no such individuals and yet everything was still more or less culturally and individually defined.

I think as we continue through studies of epigenetic and the biology of learned behavior (re: rats biologically passing on information to offspring about only mazes they've experienced) than increasingly the line between what is genetic and what isn't is going to get more and more blurry. Especially with things like hormones, psychology and the role our culture could conceivably be changing our chemistry.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I think she's upending cultural norms wether I want it or not just by being who she is. Whether it 'should be' to me is about as inapplicable as whether women 'should be' engineers or gamers because that used to be not the norm. I strongly reject assumed gender expectations or roles. Meeting this woman just made me realize that should, for me, include transgendered people too.

I think females have a long way to go in busting the gender stereotypes - like participating more in the STEM subjects and possibly not attaching so much significance to appearance - although the latter is almost forced on them by societal attitudes anyway.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I can display traits of both, but I tend to be a bland centrist androgynous and not go out of my way to be either. I can work on my car, and I work in a field that predominately women go into. Play guitar, and bake goodies.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

When you hear the term feminine male, what do you think of? How about masculine female? Do you have differing feelings on the two? Do you find one more positive or negative than the other?

Bonus: Is it possible to be neither more feminine or more masculine? Do you think that is more positive, less positive, or the same as having predominantly one trait (according to your definitions of feminine and masculine.)


*Note that this is in the discussion rather than debate area.

I see the two as personality and behavioral demenours based on cultural cues than anything else. Women used to have the built like men years years and years ago whe hunting for food. Other features in non eureopean countries have different traits between men and women personalities and behavioral traits different than other countries. Those words are probably not used universally.

From a cultural view, our country uses discriminstive or derogatory terms in everyday conversation so I dont use the terms. I use terms comfortable to that person since Im more of an identity person. I mean, when talking about who we saw at the store the other day, the first thing I hear is "was she white or black?"

I see it more deragatory and referring to behaviors and personalities in a given culture than anything else. I dont use it myself.

Edited.

 

[Akivah]

I don't quite understand the notion that one person's challenging cultural norms means they want everyone to be like them. Maybe they do, but maybe they don't. Does my challenging X notion about masculinity inevitably mean I want everyone to give up accepting X notion of masculinity for them? Or is it more likely to be the case that I want people free to choose whether or not X notion of masculinity is for them? What do you think?

I think its interesting that you view the norms as being forced onto people, instead of it being their choice.

 

[Jainarayan]

When you hear the term feminine male, what do you think of? How about masculine female? Do you have differing feelings on the two? Do you find one more positive or negative than the other?

Bonus: Is it possible to be neither more feminine or more masculine? Do you think that is more positive, less positive, or the same as having predominantly one trait (according to your definitions of feminine and masculine.)


*Note that this is in the discussion rather than debate area.

Put them all together and we have Pat.

Seriously, I've never used or heard "feminine male" or "masculine female" used. The terms I've heard and used are "femme" or "queenie"; "butch". But now seeing "feminine male" and "masculine female" they bring to mind the terms "femme", "queenie", "butch".

As to the sexuality they denote, hard to say. Some guys that seem as queer as a herd of unicorns could be the straightest things going, conversely some lumberjack type women could be straight too.

And then we have the guy from the home improvement show...



Yep, gay as a picnic basket.

 

[Sunstone]

I think its interesting that you view the norms as being forced onto people, instead of it being their choice.

I think it's interesting that you think that's how I view them.