Gender Roles

[Sarah B]

Hi Rejennyrated

Mostly, like everything else, they are tools of control, which one group of people try to use to manipulate the behaviour of a different group and as such I personally reject their validity.

When people control and manipulate people like a boy likes pink, but is verbally abused or physical punished to conform to some idealogical system, then this is just plain, Abuse.

In short they only exist if you allow them to. Personally I don't!

However it does not matter if they exist or not, because fundamentally, the majority of humans on this planet are biologically male or female (not counting the variations) and if there are no gender roles per se, the majority of these humans, will assign themselves to one of these two groups.  Hence you will still have two distinct groups, no matter how they define themselves.

So just be yourself and tell them that if they can't deal with it then that is their problem, not yours.

As always.

Kind regards
Sarah B

[CaitJ]

Hence you will still have two distinct groups, no matter how they define themselves.

Sure. Having distinct groups has nothing to do with roles though. The groups could have completely unified roles, regardless of their division in other ways.
Your argument has no logical consistency.

[VeryGnawty]

I never really felt/knew of/adhered to gender roles until I came out as trans. Then I was pressed (mostly by the trans community) to be MOAR MANLY. Still not sure what that means.

It means you are supposed to do something risky and stupid, and probably end up with an injury.  For example, riding a bicycle off a ramp so quickly that the wheel falls off when you land.  At least, that was my experience growing up with the guys.  We were always doing something adventurous and (sometimes) dangerous.

[Sarah B]

Wrong. You can ascribe femininity or masculinity to a role, but that doesn't actually make the role inherently male or female.

Yes you can ascribe female and male characteristics to a role.  However, the characteristics are a part of the role and over time become intrinsic and hence, inherent in that role.  Therefore, a role can be inherently male or female.

the acting of knitting has no inherent value as masculine or feminine. It is simply an action.

I agree

Roles are inherently genderless.

Wrong, Definition of role^1,2 goes something like this, "the characteristic and expected social behaviour of an individual".  As discussed above humans define femininity and masculinity, rightly or wrongly in a given society or culture and these terms are applied accordingly. Which proves your original premise "There are no 'gender roles'." wrong.

The fact that all roles can be performed by either males or females proves this premise. Women can weightlift, box, shoot guns, drink beer, like football, etc, etc.

Nobody disputes the fact, that given a role, either a male or a female can perform that role (regardless of how well that role is performed).  Gender roles and who play those roles are two separate issues. So what you wrote above does not prove your original premise.

Therefore the 'gender' of a role is moot, as it is not restricted to one gender.

Wrong, the gender of the role is the point.  But restriction to play that gender role, is not.

Kind regards
Sarah B
[1] Role meaning one
[2] Role meaning two

[CaitJ]

Yes you can ascribe female and male characteristics to a role.  However, the characteristics are a part of the role and over time become intrinsic and hence, inherent in that role.  Therefore, a role can be inherently male or female.

I don't think you're working on the same definition of 'inherent'.
For a gender role to be 'inherent' it needs to be hard-wired on some biological or universal level.
If it is not hard-wired on some biological or universal level, then it is a construct and therefore cannot be 'inherent'.

Wrong, Definition of role^1,2 goes something like this, "the characteristic and expected social behaviour of an individual".  As discussed above humans define femininity and masculinity, rightly or wrongly in a given society or culture and these terms are applied accordingly. Which proves your original premise "There are no 'gender roles'." wrong.

Right there in bold.
If something is an 'expected social behaviour', then it in not inherent, because it is based on socialisation, not based on an inherent property of biochemistry.
You raise a bunch of human beings in isolation and the women won't be inherently drawn to cooking and darning socks. Different cultures have different socialised roles for men and women.
If different portions of humanity have different social roles for men and women, then these behaviours cannot be called 'inherent' because they differ across cultures!.

[VeryGnawty]

I gree wit Nobuko, and I belive was the intention of Violet to discuss the tendancy of some TG TS peopel to voer do the gender roles ascribed by society. No need to get back in the semantics of "gender roles."

I agree.  This 2-paged discussion of linguistics is a waste of forum space.  It has nothing to do with the concepts posed by the OP.

[Shana A]

I don't believe that gender roles (or stereotypes) are inherently gendered male or female, rather they are culturally learned and strictly enforced from an early age.

Personally, I prefer gender bagels to gender rolls   

Z

[Sarah B]

Sure. Having distinct groups has nothing to do with roles though. The groups could have completely unified roles, regardless of their division in other ways.
Your argument has no logical consistency.

The groups will act differently, and if they act differently, they will be role playing, why? Because they are human.  Hence my argument is logical.

Kind regards
Sarah B

[xxUltraModLadyxx]

i would like to take it a step further and say that i don't think gender is anything more than a human identity. yes, males and females may have brains that are wired differently, but i can't find two males or two females that are exactly the same. who is anyone to tell us what it is to be a male or what it is to be a female when there is no one set in stone example of a person doing that, that we should all worship and try to be like. what's more, anything can shift or change our genders. not as dramatically as some tabloid headline screaming "he was a she!"but, so many things about you can change. like your favorite color so on and so forth. gender truly is socially constructed as something others are expected to live up to, but like i said before, males and females may have different brain wiring, but how many of us have not done something we would've truly enjoyed doing, and instead said, "i can't do this because i'm a man/woman." pretty much everyone.

[CaitJ]

The groups will act differently, and if they act differently, they will be role playing, why? Because they are human.  Hence my argument is logical.

But the behaviours displayed are not inherent. They are learned.

[xxUltraModLadyxx]

But the behaviours displayed are not inherent. They are learned.

that's true. an example, i don't think i would want to wear makeup at all if it wasn't a cultural thing women do to appear more attractive. it's not like we come out of the womb knowing all this stuff. we have to learn it somehow.

[Sarah B]

If gender roles are based, on inherent characteristics based on our biological bodies or learned through socialisation.  It does not matter, we have gender roles in our society and they will be with us for the foreseeable future.

Kind regards
Sarah B

[CaitJ]

If gender roles are based, on inherent characteristics based on our biological bodies or learned through socialisation.  It does not matter, we have gender roles in our society and they will be with us for the foreseeable future.

In that case, you don't forsee very far.

[Sarah B]

Hi Vexing

In that case, you don't forsee very far.

Unfortunately, I 'forsee' a lot further than that. Thank you Vexing for the discussion, it was enlightening.

Kind regards
Sarah B

[CaitJ]

Unfortunately, I 'forsee' a lot further than that.

Apparently not.

[rejennyrated]

And there, I think perhaps we should leave it, and let Violet have her thread back.

Sorry for the slight derail of which I myself was a part. Even if we didn't end up agreeing it was interesting to see the various arguments.

Right now good people lets try to get back on the original track which I think was about whether people in the early stages of transition tend to try and become the stereotypical member of their target gender, and indeed whether this is simply adopted behavior with intent of making their passage through the "therapy and assessment" stage easier. 

[Jessica B]

"I have notice what Violet point it out, and ponder perhaps as an "overcorrection" mechanis. Personally, I a m what I am, most of the time playing conciously or uncociously a female role, and sometimes uncociosly playing a male role." –Perlita85, Gender Roles
 
       Perlita85, that is exactly what I mean.  It is interesting to me as often I play myself as though I am on a stage given my environment and only when in private, or on leave or in a safe place off post or very safe place on post do I let myself be myself.  My therapist and significant other refer to me as brilliant actress ^_~.  (when ever I try to let myself out in a duty environment my partner, doctor and the Chaplin all reel me in >.<)

        Vexing,
   Yes, Gender Roles are a social construct and change based on the social-cosm and social microcosm that one prescribes to.  I find myself to be far more fluid as the situation dictates unless I am at home that is, there I relax.  Gender Roles are learned, regardless as to were you fit your taught them though osmosis via your environment (personal interactions, media, and direct education among others). 

   There is no need to become combative about the discussion, the point was a discussion ^_~ and I am thankful so many of you have decided to participate.  But yes, I was curious as to what sorts of social identifies many of you hold as your own.  What sort of social diversity is there in our community?  But again, it's a discussion! I'm not about to place it on rails!

          Respectfully,
          -Violet
   
   

           

[Pica Pica]

Nowadays, I do what comes naturally and let other people ask the questions.

[CaitJ]

If you look at GG who are ascertive you will notice that they have learn to play the male role.

I strongly disagree with this; women can be strong and assertive without playing a 'male role'.

[Rebekah with a K-A-H]

Vexing and Sarah-

You're both right- to a point. I will say that many of our society's expectations for people of each sex are purely constructed and artificial and that socialization explains how most stereotypical behaviors become what people are expected to abide by.  However, I think there are sexually differentiated behaviors that generally align with biological sex. Obviously this isn't always the case as it ignores intersexuality and the many children whose biological "gender role performances", as it were (though it seems criminal to use that word, and I don't think it's really an appropriate label), do not match the socially acceptable performance. But it's impossible to ignore the fact that animals have behaviors that differ between the sexes, and humans are no different.

For example, chimpanzee boys will often tangle with each other and fight with sticks, while the girls frequently carry sticks and treat them like dolls or babies. These aren't products of social construction, obviously. In the same way, humans have some behaviors which are innate and differ between boys and girls. This isn't to say that the behaviors are absolutely differentiated, perfectly, all the time, but to say that zero human behaviors are innately male or female seems misleading, at least.