Is gender studies a fraud?

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

Society, I think, doesn’t give us gender roles, it reinforces them…

Yes, that pretty much sums it up.

[jakelafortParticipant]

It is a nature/nurture issue. And wow it is tough to allocate the influence of the two drivers. Sam Harris has a great recent podcast with a behavioral geneticist who asserts that anatomy is not quite destiny but genetics play a very strong role in human behavior. That view is unpopular with far left thinkers. One of the factors that always seems to be omitted when debating nature/nurture is to what extent genetics creates environments.

One of the features of our brain is plasticity. The dependence on the greater tribe and the immediate family allow an almost Konrad Lorenz imprint on the child. Oh and btw a recent science experiment proves that neural connectivity in ALL MAMMALS is identical. Special Creation ha? That aforementioned plasticity is what gives us a survival advantage in being ultra adaptable even while most individuals are inflexible after ‘imprint’. The group can be this way or that and have this gender role or that gender role. Iroquois for instance are famous for female leaders who decided when to wage war. Kung Bushmen have or had almost no hierarchy and less well defined gender roles. All of the western religious groups impose very strict gender roles shitting upside down on women. Secular civ is much closer to egalitarian and fluid. What does it all mean? IDK but i need to hit this next pic 3.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

Unseen wrote:

EXAMPLE: Society reinforces the natural tendency of men to be defenders of their home and hearth but tells women to nurture and sustain their family’s children. However, when needed, we expect men to engage in some nurturing and sustaining and when needed for women to defend hearth and home.

This is how the alpha male and “his” females behave, as well, in other primate species.

According to Frans de Waal in his book, “Chimpanzee Politics”, the lower-ranking males can find ways to mate with fertile females, in secret, behind the alpha’s back.

[DavisModerator]

I’ve never read a non-post-modern work by someone in gender studies which denies biological differences. What they argue is that much of it has been blown all out of proportion, especially considering the number of matriarchal societies that have been encountered on multiple continents. Biological differences only need be considered in a very very small number of issues and in absolute no cases have anything to do with the principle aims of gender equality like: the end of sexual harassment/assault, workplace discrimination and the wage gap, barriers to political and economic opportunities and getting people to admit there are even problems at all to be dealt with. Biological differences are utterly irrelevant in this case. And they are totally irrelevant when it comes to the gender that somebody identifies with (let alone sexual preferences) that need not have anything to do with the sex one is born with. I mean, if you can accept that sexual preferences need not be hard coded to the genitals you were born with then it is only the tiniest little leap to accept the same is true with gender.

[UnseenParticipant]

Simon Paynton wrote:

This is how the alpha male and “his” females behave, as well, in other primate species.

And not “This is how the alpha female and ‘her’ males behave, as well, in other primate species.”

As with cats and their owners/servants, we may be confused as to who is really dominant when it comes to the sexes.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

Davis wrote:

I’ve never read a non-post-modern work by someone in gender studies which denies biological differences.

If we take Camille Paglia at her word, and accept that there are some gender study theorists who deny that there are biological differences between the sexes – why would people do that?  What could be the motivation to deny biological differences?

[jakelafortParticipant]

Simon here is my guess.

If we are born tabula rasa then the ills of society are attributable only to the external circumstances. Once having identified the bad actors it is easy to know where to lay the blame.

Secondly if we are not biologically driven even one damn bit then equality is achievable if only we can alter the power structure.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

It’s not just the power structure – it’s also about caring for people’s needs, appropriately.

I also think that female or feminine qualities need to be valued for themselves, on their own terms.  There are strengths in the apparently vulnerable feminine ways of doing things.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

I also think that female or feminine qualities need to be valued for themselves….

Can you list a few female qualities that a man cannot possess?

[jakelafortParticipant]

Channeling Simon…one unique feminine quality is: Does my ass look big in this dress?

[_Robert_Participant]

Simon Paynton wrote:

It’s not just the power structure – it’s also about caring for people’s needs, appropriately. I also think that female or feminine qualities need to be valued for themselves, on their own terms. There are strengths in the apparently vulnerable feminine ways of doing things.

Personal relationships involve power struggles at some point. When dealing with my partners, a common theme I noticed is passive-aggressive sulking for little or no apparent reason. An apology seems to be the only cure. This ‘silent treatment’ is a terrible strategy in the office. Nobody gives a damn if you sit at your desk and sulk all day. I have counseled my partners that they must bring work issues to the table directly and not rely on osmosis as a method of communication.

Even in my personal relationships I have learned to avoid apologizing to a sulking partner if I was not notified of my crime.

[UnseenParticipant]

Simon Paynton wrote:

Davis wrote:

I’ve never read a non-post-modern work by someone in gender studies which denies biological differences.

If we take Camille Paglia at her word, and accept that there are some gender study theorists who deny that there are biological differences between the sexes – why would people do that? What could be the motivation to deny biological differences?

That’s easy (and, I would think, obvious). If there’s no such thing as biological gender, then anybody can have any gender. A man with a vagina or a woman with a penis. However society decides to shape them. The motivation is to be able to say “But for society, I coulda been a contender.” There are things women do not excel at. Now, there’s a guilt-free reason for it. It’s a conspiracy! Those people with dicks fix things so they run the show.

Now, while that’s undeniably true to a degree, it’s not the whole story. Take art. Painting in particular. If you want to talk about famous painters who were women, you have Grandma Moses, a primitivist, and Mary Cassat, the impressionist. Does anyone think that the reason there are no female painters at the level of a Rembrandt, Vermeer, or Van Gogh is due to a vast male conspiracy?

The situation is worse in music. Many of the very best performing musicians are female, but show us the female composer who’s produced anything of undeniable importance or genius, really. Men are just NATURALLY better at some things.  Women are just as good in other fields, like writing and fabric art and, maybe, crafts in general, where we might even say they are better.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 8 months ago by  Unseen.

[jakelafortParticipant]

Unseen, how about Georgia O’Keefe?

A lot of what you point out is a result of opportunity.

[DavisModerator]

Unseen, why do intellectual charlatans do and say stupid things? I could ask the same about Jordon Peterson. Or post-modernist philosophers. Or nobel prize winning scientists who become believers in alternative medicine. Because they have an agenda that overrides their ability to use reason and critical thinking. The point is, they represent a minority fringe view. It is irrelevant to actual rational arguments that the majority make. I agree it is useful to refute them, but it is absolutely poisonous to SHOWCASE them, and as Jordon Peterson does and a large number of alt-right and ultra-conservative and anti-feminist people do, try to paint feminism, gender-studies and most progressive studies as “nothing but such charlatans”. I mean, that is just as intellectually repugnant as the work the charlatans we are criticizing do.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:

Can you list a few female qualities that a man cannot possess?

Your point is right, that people of either gender can have any trait or quality.  However, statistically, some traits or qualities show up more in females, and some more in males.

I think a female strength is friendly cooperation.  I think that women rely on a social support system, on average, more than men do.

[Author]

Posts