Men and Women

[McBell]

What did I say that you don't understand?

This:

So according to you, if I have a stereotype that says women should not work outside the house once she has children, am I justified in proclaiming any biological female with kids working outside the house is no longer a woman?

Again, WTF are you talking about?

 

[The Hammer]

All diseases, deformities, and afflictions are within the realm of human variation; would you agree?

Those that don't inhibit reproductive success.

 

[Yerda]

So is that a yes?

Well, to be honest I think it is likely that the thoughts and feelings are the gender identity bubbling to the surface. Most of what is going on isn't within our conscious understanding.

Your gender identity is deeper than thoughts and feelings, right?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

No, you would like people as indivuduals to be consistent or coherent, right?
Okay, that would be nice, but it is still subjective that you want that.
You have an idea of better. So do I, it might just be somewhat different.

The fun starts if we try to find a middle ground.

Everything is subjective. Are you suggesting your preference is for people to be inconsistent and incoherent?

 

[Kfox]

This:

Again, WTF are you talking about?

If what makes a woman is based on stereotypes, that would include my negative stereotypes I might have about women; do you agree?

 

[Kfox]

Those that don't inhibit reproductive success.

I think we agree

 

[Kfox]

Well, to be honest I think it is likely that the thoughts and feelings are the gender identity bubbling to the surface. Most of what is going on isn't within our conscious understanding.

If not thoughts, what is it based on?

Your gender identity is deeper than thoughts and feelings, right?

My gender identity is based on my biological sex.

 

[The Hammer]

I think we agree

Except the conclusions we draw from that differ. Because we probably do not agree on what reproductive success means ie what behaviors do and not diminish reproductive success.

 

[The Hammer]

My gender identity is based on my biological sex.

Good for you?

 

[McBell]

If what makes a woman is based on stereotypes, that would include my negative stereotypes I might have about women; do you agree?

yes.

 

[Yerda]

If not thoughts, what is it based on?

I expect that the thoughts are based on the identity and not the other way around. Like I said, I expect it goes deeper than our conscious mind.

My gender identity is based on my biological sex.

Maybe it is. Maybe the two just happen to cohere and so you've never been in a position to notice any discrepancy. In any case as long as you're happy with who you are it shouldn't really matter/

 

[McBell]

I expect that the thoughts are based on the identity and not the other way around. Like I said, I expect it goes deeper than our conscious mind.


Maybe it is. Maybe the two just happen to cohere and so you've never been in a position to notice any discrepancy. In any case as long as you're happy with who you are it shouldn't really matter/

Or it could be that one male stereotype is having a penis...

 

[Kfox]

Except the conclusions we draw from that differ. Because we probably do not agree on what reproductive success means ie what behaviors do and not diminish reproductive success.

How do you suspect we differ?

Good for you?

Yes! If I had the biology of a female but felt as I do now, I would identify as a woman. A lesbian woman, but a woman non the less.

 

[Kfox]

yes.

Looks like we understand each other.

 

[Kfox]

I expect that the thoughts are based on the identity and not the other way around. Like I said, I expect it goes deeper than our conscious mind.

If it's not based on the mind, (thoughts) and it's not based on the body (biology) what else could it possibly be based on?

Maybe it is. Maybe the two just happen to cohere and so you've never been in a position to notice any discrepancy.

Not quite. Ya see the problem lies in trying to separate gender from biology; I don't do that. I have never "felt" like a man, I've always felt like myself, and because I have the biology of a man, I identify as a man. IOW there could never be a discrepancy between how I identify gender-wise and my biology, because my gender identification is 100% based on my biology.

 

[McBell]

Not quite. Ya see the problem lies in trying to separate gender from biology; I don't do that. I have never "felt" like a man, I've always felt like myself, and because I have the biology of a man, I identify as a man. IOW there could never be a discrepancy between how I identify gender-wise and my biology, because my gender identification is 100% based on my biology.

gender (n.)​

c. 1300, "kind, sort, class, a class or kind of persons or things sharing certain traits," from Old French gendre, genre "kind, species; character; gender" (12c., Modern French genre), from stem of Latin genus (genitive generis) "race, stock, family; kind, rank, order; species," also "(male or female) sex," from PIE root *gene- "give birth, beget," with derivatives referring to procreation and familial and tribal groups.​

​

The unetymological -d- is a phonetic accretion in Old French (see D). Also used in Latin to translate Aristotle's Greek grammatical term genos. The grammatical sense is attested in English from late 14c. Jespersen ("Philosophy of Grammar," 1924) defines grammatical gender by reference to the Indo-European distinction of masculine, feminine, neuter, "whether the division be based on the natural division into two sexes, or on that between animate and inanimate, or on something else."​

​

The "male-or-female sex" sense of the word is attested in English from early 15c. As sex (n.) took on erotic qualities in 20c., gender came to be the usual English word for "sex of a human being," in which use it was at first regarded as colloquial or humorous. Later often in feminist writing with reference to social attributes as much as biological qualities; this sense first attested 1963. Gender-bender is from 1977, popularized from 1980, with reference to pop star David Bowie.​

​

seems your issues with the word "gender" are your issues.

 

[McBell]

Looks like we understand each other.

We'll just have to wait and see.

 

[crossfire]

It might be helpful to post the entry for identification from the CG Jung Lexicon:

Identification. A psychological process in which the personality is partially or totally dissimilated. (See also participation mystique and projection.)

Identity, denoting an unconscious conformity between subject and object, oneself and others, is the basis for identification, projection and introjection.

Identity is responsible for the naïve assumption that the psychology of one man is like that of another, that the same motives occur everywhere, that what is agreeable to me must obviously be pleasurable for others, that what I find immoral must also be immoral for them, and so on. It is also responsible for the almost universal desire to correct in others what most needs correcting in oneself.["Definitions," ibid., par. 742.]​

Identification facilitates early adaptation to the outside world, but in later life becomes a hindrance to individual development.

For example, identification with the father means, in practice, adopting all the father's ways of behaving, as though the son were the same as the father and not a separate individuality. Identification differs from imitation in that it is an unconscious imitation, whereas imitation is a conscious copying. . . . Identification can be beneficial so long as the individual cannot go his own way. But when a better possibility presents itself, identification shows its morbid character by becoming just as great a hindrance as it was an unconscious help and support before. It now has a dissociative effect, splitting the individual into two mutually estranged personalities.[ Ibid., par. 738.]​

Identification with a complex (experienced as possession) is a frequent source of neurosis, but it is also possible to identify with a particular idea or belief.

The ego keeps its integrity only if it does not identify with one of the opposites, and if it understands how to hold the balance between them. This is possible only if it remains conscious of both at once. However, the necessary insight is made exceedingly difficult not by one's social and political leaders alone, but also by one's religious mentors. They all want decision in favour of one thing, and therefore the utter identification of the individual with a necessarily one-sided "truth." Even if it were a question of some great truth, identification with it would still be a catastrophe, as it arrests all further spiritual development.[On the Nature of the Psyche," CW 8, par. 425.]​

One-sidedness is usually due to identifying with a particular conscious attitude. This can result in losing touch with the compensating powers of the unconscious.

In a case like this the unconscious usually responds with violent emotions, irritability, lack of control, arrogance, feelings of inferiority, moods, depressions, outbursts of rage, etc., coupled with lack of self-criticism and the misjudgments, mistakes, and delusions which this entails.["The Philosophical Tree," CW 13, par. 454.]​

 

[Kfox]

gender (n.)​

c. 1300, "kind, sort, class, a class or kind of persons or things sharing certain traits," from Old French gendre, genre "kind, species; character; gender" (12c., Modern French genre), from stem of Latin genus (genitive generis) "race, stock, family; kind, rank, order; species," also "(male or female) sex," from PIE root *gene- "give birth, beget," with derivatives referring to procreation and familial and tribal groups.​

​

The unetymological -d- is a phonetic accretion in Old French (see D). Also used in Latin to translate Aristotle's Greek grammatical term genos. The grammatical sense is attested in English from late 14c. Jespersen ("Philosophy of Grammar," 1924) defines grammatical gender by reference to the Indo-European distinction of masculine, feminine, neuter, "whether the division be based on the natural division into two sexes, or on that between animate and inanimate, or on something else."​

​

The "male-or-female sex" sense of the word is attested in English from early 15c. As sex (n.) took on erotic qualities in 20c., gender came to be the usual English word for "sex of a human being," in which use it was at first regarded as colloquial or humorous. Later often in feminist writing with reference to social attributes as much as biological qualities; this sense first attested 1963. Gender-bender is from 1977, popularized from 1980, with reference to pop star David Bowie.​

​

seems your issues with the word "gender" are your issues.

No, I have no issues with the word, as I said before; I use the word in reference to sexual biology with humans. No issues at all.

We'll just have to wait and see.

Jes tryin' ta get a win any opportunity I get! Don't worry, I'm sure eventually we'll find something to disagree over! (LOL)

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Everything is subjective. Are you suggesting your preference is for people to be inconsistent and incoherent?

No, but that it is not as important as how they cope as such.
What you highlight is as part of it, but not all of it.

As for what everything is, that ends in different cognitive models for in effect how to understand everything, something, something else and/or nothing.
And yes, eveything is subjective in one sense, but not in another.