Can't really agree with the article here. It's missing citations, it quotes a "study" without linking to it, which is always fishy. The authors own research isn't really backed up by numbers. He...
Can't really agree with the article here. It's missing citations, it quotes a "study" without linking to it, which is always fishy. The authors own research isn't really backed up by numbers. He says he's questioned 300 queer teens, which isn't really any kind of representational number, but I can't really blame the guy, he's clearly writing in a biased fashion here.
Teenage girls are challenging the meaning and the traditional constraints of gender in ways I couldn't have imagined, but many boys are still trying to fit into a gender structure that has historically benefited them.
I also find the article's tone off. The author is praising how non-conforming teenager girls are, because wearing different clothes and cutting your hair short is enough to say adieu to your gender these days, and yet he critizes how teenage males aren't different enough?
I would also disagree with putting any kind of revolution tag on such thing. I think it's great that today teens are feeling better and better with coming out, which is why that number is rising. But I don't think that wearing non-comforming clothing or having hobbies which your gender stereotypically doesn't have is enough to reject your gender.
These are two good points. (1) Maybe the amount of diversity we're seeing now, or will see in the future, has always been there, but people were just afraid of being completely themselves. Maybe...
I would also disagree with putting any kind of revolution tag on such thing. I think it's great that today teens are feeling better and better with coming out, which is why that number is rising. But I don't think that wearing non-comforming clothing or having hobbies which your gender stereotypically doesn't have is enough to reject your gender.
These are two good points. (1) Maybe the amount of diversity we're seeing now, or will see in the future, has always been there, but people were just afraid of being completely themselves. Maybe that's what the author's trying to say? Or maybe what they should say. I think that could still be called a revolution though.
And maybe the study thing ... maybe the article is like a "preview" or "hype" thing about a study that's forthcoming? If so, your criticisms are still valid, but maybe that'd explain the weirdness with the tone.
Really interesting article; I wish it were longer. I'd really like to read the author's study when it comes out. Gender identity and expression really interests me, because I'm a cishet male who...
Really interesting article; I wish it were longer. I'd really like to read the author's study when it comes out. Gender identity and expression really interests me, because I'm a cishet male who doesn't really "fit" with many masculine identity vectors (if that's the way to put it). The older I've gotten though the more I've realized how many I do fit within, though. It's all very interesting to me because it's all so arbitrary, really: the way we express our gender is a performance of received expectations and norms from generations of entrenched culture, but those expectations are fairly meaningless in a wider sense. I'm glad that young people are realizing that and moving away from a binary, closed gender space and making way for a wider interpretation of what and who we can be.
This is precisely why I personally view gender as nothing but a social construct. I know it's more than that, and I respect whatever gender someone wants to be identified as, but gender is...
It's all very interesting to me because it's all so arbitrary, really
This is precisely why I personally view gender as nothing but a social construct. I know it's more than that, and I respect whatever gender someone wants to be identified as, but gender is completely unimportant to me and how I view the world. I don't care how people identify me (he, she, they, etc.) because it's entirely irrelevant and unimportant to me. The only thing I care about is that I know people are talking to or referring to me, which luckily is pretty easy to understand.
But I also recognize that I'm in a fairly unique place, I care about the person more than the hardware they have. If I'm into someone, I'll figure out a way to make things pleasurable if that's where the relationship goes.
I don't know, I think maybe you're right. Like, it's more than what we think of as a social construct -- it is a deep and incontrovertible part of people's identity. But I think more of our...
I personally view gender as nothing but a social construct. I know it's more than that ...
I don't know, I think maybe you're right. Like, it's more than what we think of as a social construct -- it is a deep and incontrovertible part of people's identity. But I think more of our identities than we care or want to admit are social constructs, that is, they're made by us, collectively or individually. That doesn't make them less important! I've been thinking a lot about the "divide" between "natural" and "human-made," and the more I think about it the more I think it's really a useless division. Humans are animals, are natural; we respond to stimuli just like other animals do. Just because we can think about it doesn't separate us from the rest of the "natural" world. So social constructs are just as important as genetic ones, and the way we see certain biological aspects such as skin or hair color, or sex, or gender, is just as important, if honestly not more so, than the actual biological thing.
So gender is, I think, maybe, just a social construct, but it's a super-important one that defines a lot of how we interact with the world and place ourselves in it. It's a social construct that's more important than some biological ones, like, say, eye color.
Yes, actually. I have quite a few "nicknames" because someone decided they like a particular name for me and refer to me by that name. This can get confusing, however, if someone I don't know...
Would you be fine with a person referring to you by an arbitrary name?
Yes, actually. I have quite a few "nicknames" because someone decided they like a particular name for me and refer to me by that name. This can get confusing, however, if someone I don't know refers to me by that name I don't always respond.
if you can somehow trust that a person referring to you in some pejorative way means no ill-will by it, would you be okay with that?
Yep I've got friends who regularly call me fag, gay, asshole, jerk, etc. It doesn't bother me at all because I know it's not done specifically to insult me. Or it is, but it's an insult with love.
Interesting article, the part saying that 27% teens in California identified with some level of gender non-conformity seems extremely unbelievable for me. Maybe it's just because I am not from the...
Interesting article, the part saying that 27% teens in California identified with some level of gender non-conformity seems extremely unbelievable for me. Maybe it's just because I am not from the US and that I am no longer a teen, but not so long ago I was and there definitely wasn't a single person my age who was out as gay, bi or anything on the LGBT+ spectrum.
I agree that the future will have a lot more non-binary people as we've had in the past, but I don't think "The Future Is Non-Binary", unless there's a enormous shift in the entire world's stance...
I agree that the future will have a lot more non-binary people as we've had in the past, but I don't think "The Future Is Non-Binary", unless there's a enormous shift in the entire world's stance on gender as a whole. I think that's extremely unlikely, because we have so many different cultures on our planet with so many different ideas on how gender works. Binary gender isn't going anywhere, and that's okay as long as everyone is treated equally, and people have the universal right to be what they want to be.
Can't really agree with the article here. It's missing citations, it quotes a "study" without linking to it, which is always fishy. The authors own research isn't really backed up by numbers. He says he's questioned 300 queer teens, which isn't really any kind of representational number, but I can't really blame the guy, he's clearly writing in a biased fashion here.
I also find the article's tone off. The author is praising how non-conforming teenager girls are, because wearing different clothes and cutting your hair short is enough to say adieu to your gender these days, and yet he critizes how teenage males aren't different enough?
I would also disagree with putting any kind of revolution tag on such thing. I think it's great that today teens are feeling better and better with coming out, which is why that number is rising. But I don't think that wearing non-comforming clothing or having hobbies which your gender stereotypically doesn't have is enough to reject your gender.
If you feel better that way though, so be it.
These are two good points. (1) Maybe the amount of diversity we're seeing now, or will see in the future, has always been there, but people were just afraid of being completely themselves. Maybe that's what the author's trying to say? Or maybe what they should say. I think that could still be called a revolution though.
And maybe the study thing ... maybe the article is like a "preview" or "hype" thing about a study that's forthcoming? If so, your criticisms are still valid, but maybe that'd explain the weirdness with the tone.
Really interesting article; I wish it were longer. I'd really like to read the author's study when it comes out. Gender identity and expression really interests me, because I'm a cishet male who doesn't really "fit" with many masculine identity vectors (if that's the way to put it). The older I've gotten though the more I've realized how many I do fit within, though. It's all very interesting to me because it's all so arbitrary, really: the way we express our gender is a performance of received expectations and norms from generations of entrenched culture, but those expectations are fairly meaningless in a wider sense. I'm glad that young people are realizing that and moving away from a binary, closed gender space and making way for a wider interpretation of what and who we can be.
This is precisely why I personally view gender as nothing but a social construct. I know it's more than that, and I respect whatever gender someone wants to be identified as, but gender is completely unimportant to me and how I view the world. I don't care how people identify me (he, she, they, etc.) because it's entirely irrelevant and unimportant to me. The only thing I care about is that I know people are talking to or referring to me, which luckily is pretty easy to understand.
But I also recognize that I'm in a fairly unique place, I care about the person more than the hardware they have. If I'm into someone, I'll figure out a way to make things pleasurable if that's where the relationship goes.
I don't know, I think maybe you're right. Like, it's more than what we think of as a social construct -- it is a deep and incontrovertible part of people's identity. But I think more of our identities than we care or want to admit are social constructs, that is, they're made by us, collectively or individually. That doesn't make them less important! I've been thinking a lot about the "divide" between "natural" and "human-made," and the more I think about it the more I think it's really a useless division. Humans are animals, are natural; we respond to stimuli just like other animals do. Just because we can think about it doesn't separate us from the rest of the "natural" world. So social constructs are just as important as genetic ones, and the way we see certain biological aspects such as skin or hair color, or sex, or gender, is just as important, if honestly not more so, than the actual biological thing.
So gender is, I think, maybe, just a social construct, but it's a super-important one that defines a lot of how we interact with the world and place ourselves in it. It's a social construct that's more important than some biological ones, like, say, eye color.
Yes, actually. I have quite a few "nicknames" because someone decided they like a particular name for me and refer to me by that name. This can get confusing, however, if someone I don't know refers to me by that name I don't always respond.
Yep I've got friends who regularly call me fag, gay, asshole, jerk, etc. It doesn't bother me at all because I know it's not done specifically to insult me. Or it is, but it's an insult with love.
Interesting article, the part saying that 27% teens in California identified with some level of gender non-conformity seems extremely unbelievable for me. Maybe it's just because I am not from the US and that I am no longer a teen, but not so long ago I was and there definitely wasn't a single person my age who was out as gay, bi or anything on the LGBT+ spectrum.
I agree that the future will have a lot more non-binary people as we've had in the past, but I don't think "The Future Is Non-Binary", unless there's a enormous shift in the entire world's stance on gender as a whole. I think that's extremely unlikely, because we have so many different cultures on our planet with so many different ideas on how gender works. Binary gender isn't going anywhere, and that's okay as long as everyone is treated equally, and people have the universal right to be what they want to be.