AndytheNerd posted the following on Tumblr. http://andythenerd.tumblr.com/post/24127316517/anonymous-asked?og=1&fb_action_ids=3490410453876&fb_action_types=tumblr-feed%3Apost&fb_source=other_multiline
Here's a VERY incomplete response to the post. This needs decades of research, not a first-draft blog post on only 2 cups of coffee, first thing in the morning. But I think it's better I post something, rather than nothing at all. Maybe we can start looking at this stuff?
The problem with all these conversations -- feminist, GenderQueer, Trans*, Queer, Intersex, etc. -- is the emphasis on SOCIAL science theories, rather than BIOLOGICAL science theories.
Anybody can define anything, as long as they are in the academy, have alphabet soup after their name, publish, teach and live in the hermetically sealed chambers of the hallowed halls. Many of these social theories are based on faulty input. Someone has a pet political ideology and that completely colors their statements of "fact" about a social issue. We see this in the influence of Marxism in some schools of feminism, for example. Marx is very limited and limiting. My argument is: ok, under Marx, the WORKERS own the factories. Fine and dandy. But, if the factories are still destroying the planet, what good is THAT doing anybody?
Social theory is a great STARTING point for conversations about social issues/isms. But it's JUST a starting point; it's speculation, at best and ideological dogma, at worst.
The influence of so-called "radical" "feminism" on the Trans* community is having a negative, reactionary impact, as an example. Trans* people have been so verbally abused, vilified, disrespected by shrill, self-righteous women who accuse them of monstrous things, put words in their mouths without listening to them, attribute motives that have little to do with Trans* folks' real experiences.
Therefore, it's not safe to even ASK biological science questions among some Trans* folk, not trained in scientific method. That's seen as a potential threat, a judgment, a condemnation and is met with a great deal of hurt, suspicion, resentment and hostility. How can we assess reality, if asking questions is taboo.
Here's a set of questions some Trans* folk sometimes react defensively toward.
Why can't children just be children? Why is it even considered appropriate to assign specific, material objects (such as toys, wardrobe, etc.) to one of two genders, and then assign an individual child to one of those genders, based on interest in those material items? How is it appropriate to assign a pre-pubescent child into this "either/or" category, merely based on the child's interest in objects?
Do human beings create material objects, or do material objects create human beings?
If the child lived in a culture in which cis-gendered males wear elaborate make up and wardrobe and exhibit very stylized postures and facial expressions, would we assign that child as male or female? How much of our social science definitions about gender are completely prejudiced and influenced by Western cultural values, rather than innate gender differences? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wodaabe
|presumably Heterosexual, cis-gendered male Wodaabe||, seeking mate|