You must log in or register to comment.
This is my people. By that, I mean “nerdy leftists who are pretty self-aware in their absurdity, but it can be very hard to tell from the outside, so they are often very cringe to people who aren’t of the same story”. It’s silly, and I love it
Have more gender repeal parties. You’re all free of gender. Now let’s fuck.
Then technically these should be renamed to “Genital Reveal Parties” but that would imply a different type of party…
“Child genital information session.”
“Sex reveal party”. No, that sounds bad, too. “Assigned sex at birth reveal party”. You know what? Maybe we shouldn’t make such a big deal about what sex someone is born as and let them tell us who they are as they figure it out.
We should just have a 2nd trimester party or something so the parents get to celebrate at around the same time
amen
Do people feel like you can’t say if it’s a girl or a boy before they’re old enough to express some preference? That seems to be the thing people pick on with gender reveal parties but that doesn’t really make sense to me if you’re cool with “It’s a girl. We’re going to name her Alice.” without the party. It’s not like the party is usually hyper fixated on gender roles. You cut some cake or pop some balloons during a pretty normal family party. Sex chromosomes/genitals are one of the only unique things you really learn about the baby before they’re here that isn’t generally considered bad news. I guess we could have height percentile parties?
I might guess with such a party you really reinforce everyone’s image of the baby’s sex and they might be less accepting if the person comes out as a different gender further down the line? Idk
Doesn’t really matter. The moment the people hear it’s male or female, determines how people will treat the baby. Put a baby boy in pink and don’t tell people, and people will talk to him like they would to a girl.
Whether or not people accept the small chance that the kid turns out transgender, depends on their personal views. I doubt a gebder reveal party is significant. Besides, it’s a party for the parents to be. Not the baby.
Only if the professor comes out of the cake like a stripper
gender reveal parties, but a pendant shows up and explains it’s meant to be a sex reveal party, but due to the more risque use of the word sex, and the ambigious uses of the word gender, communication about the motive of such things are difficult, and a feeding ground for pendants, people who have been marginalised, and oppressors.
I also don’t know where I’m going with this. I’m not sure what my next task should be and I’m letting my mind percolate.
Genital reveal party
It really is a genital reveal party… Never thought about it that way. Thanks!
Was it an opal pendant, or perhaps a cameo?
Also, I prefer French press over percolate.
The time of the French press has passed. It’s time for the percolator ( 16 years ago anyway).
Pedant here, use an Oxford comma.
oxford deez nuts.
fixed it anyway.
Ambiguous usage of the word is one of the reasons oppressors have such outdated and undereducated views. The less ambiguity the easier it can be explained to the common folk.
The fun bit is that the word gender was pulled from linguistics into sociology exactly to try to make a less ambiguous situation.
It literally went "what if we talked about people having gender like the French talk about objects?” Much like people, a table is feminine in French regardless of if it has a penis or not.
Later, people decided to use gender as a synonym for sex and complain about using the word gender in a way that’s ambiguous with sex.
a table is feminine in French regardless of if it has a penis or not.
Which most tables in France do, of course.
Gender has been conflated with human sex from the fifteenth century, but I like your explanation of the sociological application.
Who invited the streaker to the gender reveal party?
Me. The last one was boring. And the one before that started a huge fire. Figured nudity was safer.
Saying gender is binary is like saying there are only two types of apples, red and green.
There are two types of apples: Red Delicious and edible
I see you have never read the definitive apple ranking site and the Rome Apple review.
Perfect, case closed.
There are two types of apples, red apples and non-red apples. D’ya see? Everything in the universe either is a banana or it is not, all is binary.
Quantum physics would like a word
Quantum physics doesn’t exist, it is invented by physics professors to sell you more quants
Something is in a quantum superposition state or it isn’t, absolute binariness.
chess/similar games/sports :
Women
Open
I don’t think I quite understand…
There are two types of apples, red apples and non-red apples.
Is what the other person said. Paralels happen in certain game/sport categorizations, with women being a defined grouping, and all else (including women) being put into the open/other category.
Are they really having a “womans chess competition”? that sounds like a joke…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Blitz_Chess_Championship_2024
nope.
The goal is to improve the women’s experience and make it more feasable as a career choice for the best women. Sometimes it gets controversial, even among women, but it’s a noble idea until women and men are evenly represented in top tournaments.
Notable female players that reached near the level of the top men include Judit Polgar (Peak ranking : 8th worldwide) and Hou Yifan (Peak ranking 55th worldwide).
There is no physical gender/sex/whatever based reason why women underperform compared to men, so until societal/environmental factors change, trying to enable more women to reach higher levels with incentives seems good. They are not barred from the open category (which people mistakenly call “mens’” sometimes) , so they can choose which tourney they attend. Some “open” (I’ve now realised open can have two meanings, I am only referring to tourneys that can be played by any gender, not the opposite of invite based) tourneys even make a point to request the female world champ participate.
I’ve written lots about this in the past, but don’t have much time now
You know what it’ll be yet?
Yes, they’ll be a wage slave.
i don’t see the point they are trying to make, of course it’s a social concept, that’s why it’s a social gathering. that’s like going to a party for a doctoral degree and tell them its a social construct, like yeah so?
If you understand that it’s a social construct then you must understand that gender reveal parties are crepy af.
Exactly, just have a single celebration on the birthday and be done with it. Why so obsessed about the genitals of an unborn child.
I’m pretty sure op was just trying to be funny
Successfully failed
What’s the point of a gender reveal party if not an excuse to use high explosives? There’s no fun if something isn’t being blown up in some way or form.
Let them organize their own gender reveal party when they are old enough to decide
Gender identity is biological, and gender is not only a social construct:
https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2013/10/07/book-excerpt-gender-more-performance
Results: Evidence that there is a biologic basis for gender identity primarily involves (1) data on gender identity in patients with disorders of sex development (DSDs, also known as differences of sex development) along with (2) neuroanatomical differences associated with gender identity.
Conclusions: Although the mechanisms remain to be determined, there is strong support in the literature for a biologic basis of gender identity.
That’s not saying what you seem to be implying, and it’s not contrary to what people mean when they say gender is a social construct.
Saying gender expression is not only performance is not really related to gender being a social construct.What we define the genders to be is what is a social construct. The masculine gender encompasses a wide array of behaviours and expressions, as does the feminine. The behaviours and attitudes we assign to each gender is what’s socially constructed. People tend to have a gender identity that matches their biological sex, and through acculturation we teach them the behaviors associated with each gender in our culture. Some people later realize that they’re most comfortable conforming to a different gender than what matches their sex.
I agree with you that the “gender is a social construct” is ultimately an ontological claim, about what gender is. When I hear “gender is just a social construct”, especially from an anthropologist, I am entirely expecting a social constructionist account of gender, that’s what they are communicating - what gender is.
Clearly there are social elements to gender, like the color we associate with a gender, which has changed over time and is arbitrary. There is nothing intrinsic about gender-color associations, no reason “blue” means “boy” and “pink” means “girl”.
Regarding gender expression not only being performance: some people use Butler’s performative theory of gender as a social constructionist account of gender. It’s not really a coincidence in my mind that Butler shares some intellectual roots with the psychoanalytical sexologists who popularized social constructionist views in the 1960s, so while I’m sure you could parse several social constructionist accounts I don’t think it’s unfair to lump them together as a broad camp. The Julia Serano article I linked even does this:
Look, I know that many contemporary queer folks and feminists embrace mantras like “all gender is performance,” “all gender is drag,” and “gender is just a construct.” They seem empowered by the way these sayings give the impression that gender is merely a fiction. A facade. A figment of our imaginations.
Notice how she lumps together views like “all gender is performance” and “gender is just a construct”. I think this article is a relevant response to “gender is a social construct”.
And yes, it depends somewhat on what people actually mean when they say “gender is a social construct”, but I generally take them to mean that they believe in a social constructionist account of gender, i.e. that gender is entirely arbitrary, the result of how we are raised, and the result of socialization. If you are raised a boy, you are a boy because of how you were raised.
The idea that gender identity is biological, which is what that Safer meta-analysis concludes, contradicts the social constructionist account because it claims that a person’s gender is intrinsic to them in some way, for example you can’t just take a boy and raise them as a girl without problems (as the case of David Reimer illustrates, when the sexologist, John Money, who believed gender was just a construct and tested that theory by trying to have a boy raised as a girl).
You’re putting far too much thought into what other people mean by the phrase, particularly in the context of a joke.
Most people are not referring to several different anthropological, sociological, and feminist theories/philosophies.When you disagree with “gender is a social construct” in a casual setting, intentionally or not, you’re conveying the statement “gender is innately tied to biological sex, there are precisely two, and trans people are invalid”.
It’s better to take the phrase as meaning “having a vagina doesn’t mean you’re a hot pink wearing pretty princess, nor does a penis imply you aren’t. Gender is more complicated than a binary, and we’re better off raising children as little people who tell us who they are than spending too much time being concerned that they only play with plastic figurines compatible with their genitals and playacting the right chores”.
It’s a joke about tricking people into attending an event usually focused on baby genitals, and then instead giving them cake that isn’t coded to the babies genitals with a lecture about how they don’t tell you as much about who this little person will be as people think.
