-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
there's nothing natural about traditional gender roles
- Thread starter sun rise
- Start date
Alien826
No religious beliefs
Not true. I couldn't find a comparison to lettuce, but it's 45% with cabbage.
Your entire post is about animals who have traditional gender roles. They just happen to different than human gender roles.
So humans aren't the only animal that has developed gender roles so how is gender roles unnatural?
For whatever reason, gender roles have developed partly because of evolutionary traits. Certainly some of it is due to cultural evolution but that is not a complete answer.
Last edited:
Where is this information from?
Alien826
No religious beliefs
From where most stuff like that emerges.
I can't find any scholarly works on this. I would like to see the source of a claim like that.
It doesn't make sense. Especially in light of the fact that all other information is consistent with humans and all mammals being highly divergent from plants. For that matter, all animals are very genetically distant from plants.
Medical diagnosis is just that.
Social constructs like gender roles are made up and tend to differ across countries and even time.
So why should we call that normal?
I suppose you could say that pretty much everything we do is natural by definition. But homosexuality also tends to fall under that particular category so….
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Now it needs a college education to become cauliflower!
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
Murder and rape have been observed in animals and humans, so does that make it natural? Should we now embrace these behavior because we see it in nature and also because some humans do it?
Cows chew their cud, which essentially is partially digested food, they puke up, to chew a second time. Does that mean eating your puke is natural to humans since millions of cows do it? The answer is no. The reason cow do this is based on cow digestive physiology, and not human vanity and political legal strategy. I am surprised anything called science would define each species with unique distinctions, and then say humans are like another species. This is political science fiction.
Female and male have been defined by science via the X or Y chromosomes. This definition is based on form and function. The X chromosome has the genes needed to grow a baby from scratch; genes needed for a natural 4-D printer. Since humans do not live in a vacuum, the X-chromosome would also have natural behavior to help initiate, feed and control the printing process via interaction with the environment.
Left wing ideology is applying pressure to science, to lie about this clear cut divide. The term sex was originally used to define the roles in reproduction not tool for marking clothes. This is the most general definition for the differences in functionality between X and Y chromosomes. The term was defined by science in a clear cut way, to avoid legal con jobs.
The main problem is, the Life sciences still use the same math, used by politics and gambling casinos; statistics. There was a reason why gambling was not considered moral behavior by many religion. The land of fuzzy dice is more a land of illusions and addictions. The Life Sciences still use the same math as gambling casinos; slot machine pay outs. Like a slot machine in a casino, coffee is good today but bad tomorrow. It depends on the study and Lady Luck. This is not a reliable way to do science, if the goal of science is clarity and truth in nature.
You will never see politics going after rational science; Physics, or question why water is H2O, since this is not based on odds. Politics can only infiltrate things that which uses the same casino math, as they do. The margin of error of both systems makes it easier to lie or create reasonable doubt. Cause and affect is too tight, and is not as easy to manipulate.
The "like the animals" approach is a lawyer and casino approach to science. It is used to create reasonable doubt with fuzzy dice. It is not so much about proving innocence, but about creating reasonable doubt, that something may not be guilty. The compassionate person will more often err on the side of caution, less one falsely judge. Lawyers depend on this.
The tell about the true nature of the gender movement is is how the Leadership of the Left, has gone about the teaching of gender. They have infiltrated schools, trying to teach vulnerable minors, who are already insecure at that age about the changes of life, all behind their parents back. This is a recipe for brain washing. If it was not brain washing, it would be open discussion in school, and not set up like a forced re-education camp in the Old Soviet Union; penalize dissenters.
For those who are young and may not know the Love Generation history; 1960-70's, the original Left Wing argument, that I once supported out of youth and ignorance, that helped to break up the basic family unit, was connected to the argument that traditional marriage was nothing but an arbitrary social construct. It was argued; by our lawyers, is was not natural or God given. Based on animal observations, and some tribal cultures, it was arbitrary and man made. This new legal argument opened the doors to alternate life styles, with all of us assuming all approaches were are just as as good or just as manmade. Back then, many younger people experimented, but were not pretending any particular man made construct was the bee's knees. That pathology would come a decade later; man made is suddenly called natural.
If we assume the Left was not lying back then; it seemed sincere, how is the gender fad not just a Left Wing man made social construct, since even male and female, as husband and wife, was considered one? The closed door indoctrination of young children and teens, behind parents back, to avoid any deprogramming, tells us this is the Left, programming a new social construct. It is now being sold as natural. It uses animal arguments, to con their victims; reasonable doubt, so they go along, with their manmade robot construct roles. These new manmade robots need a lot of resources, compares to the rest of the constructs, which will make the most money for their life science business donors, who use the same fuzzy dice math.
By the way, the results from the experiment, with all the various life styles; beyond male and female marriage, are in and from that wide range of data; combinations including gender and hermaphrodite, one can conclude the traditional husband (y) and wife (x), has the lowest social costs. It does not need all the expensive artificial drugs and surgical changes, now required by the latest social construct.
Last edited:
Alien826
No religious beliefs
It does, but colleges attended by vegetables are different. For example, there are two courses only, Grow 101 and Grow 201. The first consists of one word, "grow". The second is two words, "keep growing".
rocala
Well-Known Member
Orbit
I'm a planet
There's a lot of misunderstanding here. Biologically, there are more genotypes than XX and XY. There is sometimes XXY and X0. Also, brain development, hormones, and anatomy may be variable (eg not pointing in a clear direction, M or F). So it's not "left wing ideology" it's biology. But that's sex. The thread is about gender roles, which are not inevitably tied to sex, it's just that human cultures tie them together. Different cultures make room for different styles of gender expression, with some having a "third gender" category. It's just normal human diversity,
You can't fool me.
That's a monkey, not a bonobo!
How do I know?
Bonobos are fans of the Marvel universe, not DC.
So they'd never wear a Superman logo.
Madmogwai
Madmogwai
No it’s not Natural, Men and woman are by design created to be together physically.
If they don’t they have a flaw somewhere.
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
Diversity often occurs in the behavior of a species due to various reasons, and for generalists that aren't bound to a specific environment due to very specialized adaptations to it, diversity allows for survival during times of great change and challenges. Humans are very much generalists: Our major adaptation advantage, the ability to munipulate our environment and unique cognitive abilities allows us to be superb generalists.
We see flexibility in gender roles throughout human history. And given our predilection towards indulging our innate response mechanisms with supernormal stimuli, it's not surprising from an ethological perspective to see humans diversifying their gender behavior.
“Designed” is not a biological term at all.
You’re looking for creationism
For those of us (including the religious) the word natural means something in actual nature. And technically nothing we do is unnatural, since we are by definition nature.
Although I suppose some opt to accept biology as the design template.
Viker
Your beloved eccentric Auntie Cristal
'Traditional' roles are always cultural. Tradition implies a human institution. Biological traits, such as the ability to reproduce, are not roles they are a result of natural progression. Biological binary sex, male/female, is only necessary for reproduction. There's nothing else there but a biological ability with given proclivities. Everything else thereafter is up to individuals based on their own understanding, as always.
Ok but my point is gender roles are not unnatural. Any more than diversity from those roles are unnatural.
Many people find gender roles natural. I don't see anything wrong with that. Nor the choice of none gender roles.
Seems odd to call anything found in nature unnatural.
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
Human are not the same species, as these other 17 animals. Each of these species evolved their own behavior. However, if you wish to ignore that, and make a correlation based only on comparing animal sexual behavior, there are far more species with classic male and female gender and sex roles. There is an estimated 10-100 million species of animals on earth. You listed 17 species to make your case. That means there are 10-100 million (minus 17 plus species) than can be used to make the case of two sexes and genders. That is a much better natural correlation if we do not do data censorship.
Why make a correlation based on a tiny data set of exceptions, instead of the preponderance of the natural data? One answer is, this is not really about nature, but about money making. Alternate gender, as shown by a very small data set, will need a lot of medical chemicals and surgical procedures. That adds to big bucks for Big Med and lots of campaign donations, if they can pull it off and fool people with a weak correlation.
If humans were to be conditioned to act like bonobos, STD's would increase, even more than today. STD's are already a problem even with much lower social orgy participation rates. Again, this enhanced negative consequence would also help the bottom line of the medical industries, since new STD's would appear for expansion in goods and services.
The human body is not designed to work this way, or else humans would not need any cures for STD's. The bonobos have a better tolerance for this behavior, thereby showing a genetic distinction between these two species. Humans, due to STD's, needed to find a better way to optimize for the needs of natural selection. Committed male and female, which can also be found in many species; ducks, does not make STD's. There is less damage to the fruit of procreation needed for evolution; more and clearer babies. There are not many ancient orgy cultures that survived to lead advances in civilization. These were not selected. That is another data set we can explore, since gender bending is not new, but has been done before. The Roman Emperor Caligula took this to new levels. He ruled Rome with fear, terror and bonobos behavior, until assassinated.