Dolezal and Jenner

The place for measured discourse about politics and current events, including developments in science and medicine.
User avatar
yovargas
I miss Prim ...
Posts: 15011
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Florida

Re: PLEASE LOCK: Dolezal and Jenner

Post by yovargas »

Voronwë the Faithful wrote:I do, however, believe that the two issues are closely related, and I am puzzled as to why you believe they are not. In my view, they are two sides of the same coin, and together they help demonstrate how untrue the narrative that we are in a post-racial society is. On the one hand, whatever Rachel Dolezal's motivations are, there would be no reason for her or anyone to assert that they identified as a certain race in a post-racial society.

Was this thread about whether or not we live in a post-racial society? :scratch:
I wanna love somebody but I don't know how
I wanna throw my body in the river and drown
-The Decemberists


Image
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 45995
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: PLEASE LOCK: Dolezal and Jenner

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

Absolutely, among other things. It may not be about that to you, or to Faramond, but it certainly is to me. Particularly today.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
Faramond
Posts: 2335
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:59 am

Re: Is Society Post-Racial?

Post by Faramond »

I think this is a huge stretch, to make this connection, but what the hell, I'll go along with it and even change the thread title. No need to split anything or lock anything since I have capitulated.

Obviously we don't live in a post-racial society. Unless it means something different than what I think it means.

edit: I like how you can see the history of the thread title in each post, where is says "RE: <thread title>". Maybe when I'm bored I'll go look at all the different thread titles in the gay marriage thread.
User avatar
Impenitent
Throw me a rope.
Posts: 7254
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Deep in Oz

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by Impenitent »

DP
Last edited by Impenitent on Tue Jun 23, 2015 2:54 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Impenitent
Throw me a rope.
Posts: 7254
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Deep in Oz

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by Impenitent »

DP
Last edited by Impenitent on Tue Jun 23, 2015 2:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
yovargas
I miss Prim ...
Posts: 15011
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Florida

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by yovargas »

Good post, Impy. Good stuff to chew on.

(Don't have much to say but wanted to acknowledge I read and appreciated it.)
I wanna love somebody but I don't know how
I wanna throw my body in the river and drown
-The Decemberists


Image
User avatar
Cerin
Posts: 6384
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 3:10 am

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by Cerin »

Faramond wrote:Why is Dolezal criticized by most liberal writers while Jenner is celebrated?
Jenner is celebrated because he is finally able to have the physical body that matches his inner gender. It was an accident of birth that he manifested as male when he was inwardly female. It was beyond his control. So everyone is happy for him.

Dolezal is criticized because she is an imposter. She pretended to be black. There would have been nothing wrong (aside from it being a bit pathetic) with altering her appearance if she'd taken pains to let people know she was a black wannabe, but she didn't. She deceived people. It reminds me quite a bit of the brouhaha a few years ago, with this author who wrote an autobiography that elicited all sorts of sympathy about his triumph over drug addiction, and for which he went on a celebrated book tour, and it turned out to be a complete fiction. Both instances strike me as very disturbed behavior, and I think Dolezal should seek psychological help.
Why is a person allowed to define his or her own gender regardless of biology and birth circumstance, but not allowed to define his or her own race regardless of biology and birth circumstances?

Jenner isn't 'defining his own gender regardless of biology and birth circumstance'. He's medically correcting a biological error that left him in the excruciating position of having an inner and outer person that didn't match.
Avatar photo by Richard Lykes, used with permission.
User avatar
Frelga
Meanwhile...
Posts: 22446
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:31 pm
Location: Home, where else

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by Frelga »

I haven't really been following this story. But Jon Stewart did. http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/00lje ... on-cosplay
If there was anything that depressed him more than his own cynicism, it was that quite often it still wasn't as cynical as real life.

Terry Pratchett, Guards! Guards!
Faramond
Posts: 2335
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:59 am

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by Faramond »

Cerin wrote:
Faramond wrote:Why is Dolezal criticized by most liberal writers while Jenner is celebrated?
Jenner is celebrated because he is finally able to have the physical body that matches his inner gender. It was an accident of birth that he manifested as male when he was inwardly female. It was beyond his control. So everyone is happy for him.

Dolezal is criticized because she is an imposter. She pretended to be black. There would have been nothing wrong (aside from it being a bit pathetic) with altering her appearance if she'd taken pains to let people know she was a black wannabe, but she didn't. She deceived people. It reminds me quite a bit of the brouhaha a few years ago, with this author who wrote an autobiography that elicited all sorts of sympathy about his triumph over drug addiction, and for which he went on a celebrated book tour, and it turned out to be a complete fiction. Both instances strike me as very disturbed behavior, and I think Dolezal should seek psychological help.
There is no objective basis on which to say that Jenner is "inwardly female". There is no kind of scientific test that would verify this. All we can do is take Jenner's word for it, that she feels this way. And that's fine. I don't have a problem with taking her word for it.

What I really don't understand is why people aren't willing to take Dolezal's word for it that she feels black inside. In one case, the person is believed without question, in the other case, the person is either not believed, or worse, the person is judged harshly in spite of the acknowledged reality of that feeling.

Are we to just pick and choose who we believe based on which conversions are deemed acceptable, or which don't make us uncomfortable? Dolezal makes lots of people uncomfortable. So does Jenner, of course, but there are enough people who are made uncomfortable by Dolezal but not by Jenner that this seems to be the deciding factor.

Why is a person allowed to define his or her own gender regardless of biology and birth circumstance, but not allowed to define his or her own race regardless of biology and birth circumstances?

Jenner isn't 'defining his own gender regardless of biology and birth circumstance'. He's medically correcting a biological error that left him in the excruciating position of having an inner and outer person that didn't match.
And maybe Dolezal felt like she was in an excruciating position of having an inner and outer person who didn't match? Why are people so quick to judge and condemn her, without knowing what her inner self is like?
User avatar
Cerin
Posts: 6384
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 3:10 am

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by Cerin »

It seems so clear to me that race and gender are not analagous in this context, and that the integrity of the respective positions is not comparable.

What would it mean, to feel inwardly that your body was the wrong gender? We who are blessed with bodies and inner beings that match, can imagine and can know somewhat, because many transgendered people have talked about the emotional agony this presented for them, especially encountering the reactions of people who perceived their outer manifestation to be in conflict with their preferences and/or natural inclinations in dress, comportment and behavior, and judged them as strange. We also have an understanding and expectation of ways in which boys and girls, men and women look and behave differently from each other.

On the other hand, what does it mean to 'feel black inside'? What understanding and expectations do we have of the different ways in which white and black people look and behave, that would have resulted in a white-but-feeling-black-inside Dolezal being rejected or shunned by her peers?

What sort of emotional agony do you think Dolezal experienced being perceived as white while 'feeling black inside', particularly related to the way others perceived and judged her? How would this have impacted her life? What could she have not felt free doing? How would she have felt conflicted in dress, relationships, activity choices, etc.? What could she not have done looking white, who could she not have approached, what could she not have studied, what could she not have worn looking white, what goals could she not have pursued honestly, that she was able to pursue, pretending to be black?

I submit there is nothing she couldn't have tried or pursued honestly, in the goal of understanding and experiencing what it is to be black, that she pursued in pretense and deceit. It would have required courage and humility, but she could have honestly explored the black experience in America as a white woman.

If it were just a question of appearance, if what she longed for was simply to look black, she could have done that honestly, as well. She could have made a point of making sure people knew she was white, while associating with blacks. They wouldn't necessarily have needed to know to what extent she had altered her appearance.

Faramond wrote:What I really don't understand is why people aren't willing to take Dolezal's word for it that she feels black inside.

People aren't willing to accept that notion because it has no meaning. A female manifesting a male body does know what it feels like to be female inside, because she is female inside. She has those feelings, preferences, inclinations. These are real, quantifiable, biologically rooted aspects of human behavior. Are you honestly contending that 'feeling black inside' has the same kind of real, quantifiable, biologically rooted meanings?

Dolezal perhaps admires black people, wishes she looked black, wishes she could share in black culture or experience, but she can't legitimately say she 'feels black inside' (I don't know if those are her words or yours), because she doesn't know what being black feels like. She's white! Her life experience is the life experience of a white woman. Her perspective is the perspective of a white woman. Her cultural understanding is that of a white woman. The best she could say is, 'I feel like what I think it must feel like to be black.'

The effrontery, arrogance and condescension of her deception is astounding -- as if she, being white, could understand what it is like to be black. As if by making herself look black and tricking people into accepting her as black, she would then know what it's like to be black. As if that would somehow infuse her with the centuries-deep cultural heritage and legacy of oppression that is part of being black in America.

In one case, the person is believed without question, in the other case, the person is either not believed, or worse, the person is judged harshly in spite of the acknowledged reality of that feeling.

Of course she is judged harshly! She is a brazen liar, who conned everyone she came into contact with. She showed no respect for the people she claimed to identify with.

Yes, I think people are perfectly willing to believe that Dolezal wished she were black. What they take exception to is her dishonesty in pursuing her affinity for blackness.

Are we to just pick and choose who we believe based on which conversions are deemed acceptable, or which don't make us uncomfortable?

Which conversions?! There is only one conversion under consideration here. There is no such thing as 'racial conversion'. Race is defined by who our parents were, and who their parents were, and who their parents were, etc. You can't 'convert' to another race; the idea is nonsensical. Dolezal is no more black in black face than when appearing white.

Gender development, on the other hand, is affected by complicated hormonal processes during gestation, and it doesn't always go smoothly. There is a legitimate record of gender manifesting multiply or in opposition to a person's inward gender identity. So no, we don't pick and choose who we believe based on what is deemed acceptable, or what makes us comfortable. We pick and choose based on facts, established scientific knowledge, and common sense.

There is no legitimate scientific claim to be made, that inward race can be different from outward race. (The claim could only be metaphysical, that the creator put your soul in the wrong body, but that's a totally different realm from the question of gender confusion). I don't think people would condemn someone who felt a deep affinity for another race/culture and was fixated on presenting themselves in that cultural garb, as long as they were honest about who they really were.

Dolezal makes lots of people uncomfortable. So does Jenner, of course, but there are enough people who are made uncomfortable by Dolezal but not by Jenner that this seems to be the deciding factor.

No, the deciding factor is sleaze. Dolezal makes us uncomfortable because she meticulously maintained an elaborate deception and was found out. She's a dishonest person who played people for fools. Jenner makes us uncomfortable because we're used to her looking like a man, and now she doesn't.

Why are people so quick to judge and condemn her, without knowing what her inner self is like?
Because she lied! She lied sustainedly, deliberately, elaborately. Whatever her inner self is like, it doesn't justify treating people as she did.

Maybe Dolezal does feel an excruciating disparity between her inner and outer selves. Making herself look black, and tricking people into believing she shared their experience, was not a good or ethical way to deal with that inner conflict. Extensive therapy would have been a better choice.

(edit to refer to Jenner as 'she')
Avatar photo by Richard Lykes, used with permission.
nerdanel
This is Rome
Posts: 5963
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:48 pm
Location: Concrete Jungle by the Lagoon

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by nerdanel »

Cerin wrote:especially encountering the reactions of people who perceived their outer manifestation to be in conflict with their preferences and/or natural inclinations in dress, comportment and behavior, and judged them as strange.
This strikes at the heart of it: much of the problem that transgender and genderqueer individuals (plus everyone else who does not always conform to gender-expected roles) encounter IS the reactions of people who perceive a conflict between a biological male or biological female exhibiting particular "preferences and/or natural inclinations in dress, comportment and behavior."

I've read extensively about the experiences of trans-identified individuals, and I've seen these two types of experiences described (among others):

- People who exhibit a persistent physical dysphoria, believing that genitalia or gendered-body parts that they in fact have should not be there.
- People who do not experience much or any physical dysphoria, but wish to engage in behaviors, dress, etc. that is viewed by the mainstream as inconsistent with their biological sex and believe that this will be easiest if they socially or physically transition to presenting as a member of the "opposite sex."

I am interested to see - if society moves towards a direction that is more accepting of feminine men and masculine women - whether trans-identified members of the second demographic perceive less of a need to transition physically. I suspect that this will be true, but that there will still be those (in the first category) who will seek surgery and hormones to address the physical dysphoria that they are experiencing.
We also have an understanding and expectation of ways in which boys and girls, men and women look and behave differently from each other.
I'm not sure who the "we" is. Many of us do not subscribe to a belief system in which boys and girls, or men and women, should necessarily look and behave differently. But I agree that those who do subscribe to this belief system are responsible for much of the grief that gender non-conforming people experience, whether or not these people identify as transgender.
On the other hand, what does it mean to 'feel black inside'? What understanding and expectations do we have of the different ways in which white and black people look and behave, that would have resulted in a white-but-feeling-black-inside Dolezal being rejected or shunned by her peers?

What sort of emotional agony do you think Dolezal experienced being perceived as white while 'feeling black inside', particularly related to the way others perceived and judged her? How would this have impacted her life? What could she have not felt free doing? How would she have felt conflicted in dress, relationships, activity choices, etc.? What could she not have done looking white, who could she not have approached, what could she not have studied, what could she not have worn looking white, what goals could she not have pursued honestly, that she was able to pursue, pretending to be black?
I do not know what Dolezal herself experienced. It seems plausible to me that there could be forms of physical dysphoria relevant to a desire to be perceived as a member of a different race. If it is possible for someone to believe that their actual genitalia should not be present, or should exist only in different form, then it also seems plausible that someone could genuinely believe that their hair or eyes should have different qualities, their skin should be darker or lighter than it is, etc. I have never heard of this phenomenon, but it will be interesting to see if anyone else ultimately describes having these feelings.
I submit there is nothing she couldn't have tried or pursued honestly, in the goal of understanding and experiencing what it is to be black, that she pursued in pretense and deceit. It would have required courage and humility, but she could have honestly explored the black experience in America as a white woman.
Actually, I don't agree with this. A transgender person wants to experience the world as a member of the gender with which they identify, which also requires others to perceive them as a member of said gender. It would not be sufficient or accurate to tell a biological male who self-identifies as female: "you can honestly explore the female experience in America as a male," or vice versa. It seems at least as plain that a white person cannot experience "the black experience in America" if others perceive them as white. And I think Dolezal will have accessed much more of this experience (though far from all, since she was not born black or socialized as black) because others perceived her to be black, then she could have done had she been truthful about her whiteness. This is not to justify what she did, simply to disagree with your contention that she could have experienced what it was to be black while being honest about being white.
People aren't willing to accept that notion because it has no meaning. A female manifesting a male body does know what it feels like to be female inside, because she is female inside. She has those feelings, preferences, inclinations. These are real, quantifiable, biologically rooted aspects of human behavior.
There is a lot in these assertions that makes me very uncomfortable (although I must hasten to add that I support each individual's right to self-determination, including the right to assert that they are "male inside" or "female inside"). With that said: which feelings, preferences, or inclinations, in your view, make someone female inside? And how are they quantifiable?

I have no idea what it means to be "female inside." I identify as female solely because I have a female body, which causes (1) me to be subject to a gendered set of social expectations; (2) me to perceive the world in a manner that's influenced by the female hormones present within my body; and (3) me to be subject to a variety of physical and social realities (most of which are disadvantages) associated with a female body. Thus, it's not clear to me that I have anything in common with someone who identifies as a transgender woman, pre-transition. At that point in time, they have not lived with the gendered social expectations that (mostly constrain) women; they do not have the same hormonal mix as a biological female present within their bodies; and they are not experiencing the physical realities associated with a female body (less physical strength, menstruation, possible pregnancy, etc.) What they have at that point is a feeling or perception that they are female - a feeling that I do not experience in any way apart from the realities of my physical body (which they do not share). So it is not clear to me what they are feeling as it has no overlap with my experiences. I accept that they are experiencing thoughts, feelings, or realities that they perceive to be female and inconsistent with their biologically male bodies.

After they transition, there will be some commonalities between their experience and mine: if they are perceived as women, they will experience the same gendered expectations and restrictions -- although for some trans women, the experience will still be different because they want to be subject to those expectations and restrictions, whereas I see them as limiting and undesirable. (NB I understand that other trans women feel just as I do. I think that gender non-conforming transwomen are not as visible to the mainstream yet, but I'm definitely aware that they are out there.) Most-all transwomen will experience the risk of sexual violence and harassment that other women do (and likely additional harassment if they are identified as trans). And they will be subject to the influences of a blend of hormones that in some ways approximates (although certainly does not duplicate) natural female hormones. They will never experience other aspects of being (biologically) female, including menstruation, menopause, the risk or reality of pregnancy. Again, I support their right to individual self-determination - but I'm very uneasy about the form that the public discourse is taking: that what it means to be female is simply, across-the-board, to feel "female inside." If this is what it means to a particular person (trans or non-trans), then I accept their self-definition. But it's not what it means to me: I am female primarily because that is imposed upon me by virtue of a biologically female body (i.e., I am "female outside"), not because I "feel female" on the inside. When being female is defined solely as a function of an internal feeling, it seems to leave no room for experiences like mine. There needs to be room to acknowledge the relevance (or dispositiveness) of biology to why many biological females identify as women, and that's getting stripped out of the current, oversimplistic dialogue.

(Compare the "being gay is not a choice/why would you choose to be gay if you could be straight?" oversimplification in popular culture - which has caused many people to believe in a binary with two options of gay and straight, where straight is the preferable option and gay is something that should be accepted because its adherents can't choose otherwise. In addition to this narrative being rather insulting to gay people, it largely renders invisible the experiences and identifies of bisexual women and men - who do exercise a choice to act on the same-sex portion of their attractions in the face of other opposite-sex options, even where they did not choose their underlying orientation.)
I won't just survive
Oh, you will see me thrive
Can't write my story
I'm beyond the archetype
I won't just conform
No matter how you shake my core
'Cause my roots, they run deep, oh

When, when the fire's at my feet again
And the vultures all start circling
They're whispering, "You're out of time,"
But still I rise
This is no mistake, no accident
When you think the final nail is in, think again
Don't be surprised, I will still rise
User avatar
yovargas
I miss Prim ...
Posts: 15011
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Florida

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by yovargas »

Cerin wrote:We also have an understanding and expectation of ways in which boys and girls, men and women look and behave differently from each other.
We do? :scratch: I mean, we have broad stereotypes about this things but do we have anything more than that? Certainly there are plenty of people who have an understanding and expectation of ways in which blacks and whites behave differently from each other but again, that stuff is just broad stereotypes.

I haven't the slightest idea what it would mean to be only "internally male". As far as I know, being male means I have XY chromosomes and male reproductive organs and not much else. Someone with XX chromosomes and female reproductive organs could choose to call themselves male and if that's what they want, I'd respect that choice, but in the most literal sense, I do not know what they mean by that since by any definition of male that I understand, they are not male.

(PS - :wave: nel. I pretty much agree with all you said.)
I wanna love somebody but I don't know how
I wanna throw my body in the river and drown
-The Decemberists


Image
User avatar
Cerin
Posts: 6384
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 3:10 am

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by Cerin »

nel wrote:If it is possible for someone to believe that their actual genitalia should not be present, or should exist only in different form, then it also seems plausible that someone could genuinely believe that their hair or eyes should have different qualities, their skin should be darker or lighter than it is, etc.
Of course it's plausible that someone could genuinely believe that their hair or eyes should have different qualities. It's also plausible that someone could genuinely believe they're an elephant, or Albert Einstein. I think those types of fixations are generally regarded as the manifestation of some form of mental illness, because they have no foundation in reality.

This is not to justify what she did, simply to disagree with your contention that she could have experienced what it was to be black while being honest about being white.
I don't say that she could have experienced what it was to be black while being honest about being white, but nor do I believe she experienced what it was to be black while pretending to be black. What I'm suggesting is that a white person who makes a long term effort to know black people and understand their experience alongside them will come away with a limited but genuine understanding based on honest relationships and respect, which seems far more valuable to me than the superficial insights Dolezal may have gained while maintaining her charade, knowing she could switch back to being white whenever it suited her.

With that said: which feelings, preferences, or inclinations, in your view, make someone female inside? And how are they quantifiable?
A person identifying as female inside, is what makes them female inside. Presenting oneself as female in dress and manner is what I'm referring to as preference and inclination.

When being female is defined solely as a function of an internal feeling, it seems to leave no room for experiences like mine.

I don't think being female is being defined solely as a function of an internal feeling, but for those who feel they are manifesting the wrong gender, that is the only claim they can make.

There needs to be room to acknowledge the relevance (or dispositiveness) of biology to why many biological females identify as women, and that's getting stripped out of the current, oversimplistic dialogue.
I don't think it's being stripped out; it's just not acknowledged because it's obvious. If you have a woman's body and don't urgently feel that it ought to be a man's body, you're a woman. You get to define for yourself what that means!

yovargas wrote:I mean, we have broad stereotypes about this things but do we have anything more than that?
I'm referring to the broad stereotypes. It's when the broad stereotypes don't fit that we get a view of the the complexity of the sexuality continuum. The people who fit into the stereotypical range have it easier than those who don't.
Someone with XX chromosomes and female reproductive organs could choose to call themselves male and if that's what they want, I'd respect that choice, but in the most literal sense, I do not know what they mean by that since by any definition of male that I understand, they are not male.
I would guess that it can't be a matter of wanting to call oneself something, but of feeling inside that one is something, and needing to identify that way to the world.
Avatar photo by Richard Lykes, used with permission.
User avatar
Nin
Ni Dieu, ni maître
Posts: 1832
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 7:19 pm
Location: Somewhere only we go

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by Nin »

I have very little time today, but: for me the story of Dolezal made me immediately think of a very different phenomena: among the children of high Nazis, there is a quite large number which converted to judaism, among which the only living relative of Hitler directly (I think he is his great-nephew). There is a strong desire to identify which those perceived as innocent victims and not as guilty killers. I know it myself, I liked to play with the thought of becoming jewish, but being unable to believe in any form of God, I found it would have been a double, but still the thought fascinated me - how good it would be not be German any more, not to be guilty... And my emigration from Germany is certainly related to this desire and has, in the end helped me to come to peace with my German identity.

I see something alike in the behavior of Dolezal: her parents adopted several black children after her, if I recall right, and there might be this desire to be identified with the "good" side, with the loved children. And I fully understand that. The desire to be a different person than the one you are and finally the desire to live this difference as a real personae.

Race is an entirely artificial construct. A befriended couple, she is Swiss, he is from The Dominican Republic, have two daughters: one looks entirely like her mother and looks entirely white with grey eyes and hazel hair, the other looks like her dad and black. Racially: what are they? I know many examples like this. You don't look necessarily like a specific prejudged image because of your genetical inheritance. And you don't feel like it either. And I am extremely sorry that Impenitent decided to delete her thoughts on the subject, because for me they were really the most important affirmation of this thread.
Last edited by Nin on Tue Jun 23, 2015 4:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"nolite te bastardes carborundorum".
User avatar
yovargas
I miss Prim ...
Posts: 15011
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Florida

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by yovargas »

Cerin wrote:I'm referring to the broad stereotypes.
I thought you were saying it was biological? Or are you saying that the gender stereotypes are biological? :scratch:
I wanna love somebody but I don't know how
I wanna throw my body in the river and drown
-The Decemberists


Image
User avatar
Cerin
Posts: 6384
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 3:10 am

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by Cerin »

I'm saying that the complex hormonal interactions in utero that affect gender manifestation are biological. We all start out with female characteristics in the womb, until the gestational point where hormonal changes are activated. So someone who feels their gender manifestation has gone wrong is rooted in reality. It may well have gone wrong. In other words, it's not necessarily all in their head, as Dolezal's assertion that she is black, is all in her head (if my understanding is correct, that she doesn't have black ancestry).

We can't change who our parents are/were, the way we can alter our outward gender manifestation (to match our inner identity) or convert to a religion. Saying it's so, doesn't make it so. If someone denies the fact of their ancestry, moves across the globe and adopts another culture, and even takes the further step that Dolezal took, of taking on the appearance of another ethnicity, their denial makes them no less the child of their parents, biologically speaking. And here's the crucial point. I think most people understand that heritage and culture go deeper than appearance, and that posing as something they are not would disrespect the people they were imitating, and trivialize that culture, heritage and experience.
Avatar photo by Richard Lykes, used with permission.
User avatar
yovargas
I miss Prim ...
Posts: 15011
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Florida

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by yovargas »

If someone denies the fact of their ancestry, moves across the globe and adopts another culture, and even takes the further step that Dolezal took, of taking on the appearance of another ethnicity, their denial makes them no less the child of their parents, biologically speaking.
But biologically speaking, Jenner isn't any more of a female than I am, is she? Like, there is to my knowledge no test that a doctor could do that would show Jenner as anything else than a male, right?
I think most people understand that heritage and culture go deeper than appearance, and that posing as something they are not would disrespect the people they were imitating, and trivialize that culture, heritage and experience.
I've heard pretty much the exact same thing said about switching genders.
I wanna love somebody but I don't know how
I wanna throw my body in the river and drown
-The Decemberists


Image
User avatar
Cerin
Posts: 6384
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 3:10 am

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by Cerin »

yovargas wrote:But biologically speaking, Jenner isn't any more of a female than I am, is she? Like, there is to my knowledge no test that a doctor could do that would show Jenner as anything else than a male, right?
We all have the female chromosome (X). Some of us have a second X and are female, and others have a Y and are male. Gender manifestation is a more complicated process which happens in the womb. At some point, the fetus with a Y chromosome begins to turns into a male through hormonal changes. Some people are born with both male and female genitalia, and some people feel a conflict between their inner self and their outward gender manifestation. Why? I don't know. Does something in the complex system go wrong, or is it part of our genetic code from the start? Where does the essential self reside? The person with both sets of genitalia can point to their problem, the person with the inner conflict can only testify to their suffering.

No, there is no physical test, to my knowledge, that would affirm Jenner's inward gender identity.

Cerin wrote:
I think most people understand that heritage and culture go deeper than appearance, and that posing as something they are not would disrespect the people they were imitating, and trivialize that culture, heritage and experience.
I've heard pretty much the exact same thing said about switching genders.
Yes, to the person who doesn't understand or accept that gender manifestation can be different from gender identity, the two examples are analogous. And since there is no proof, I suppose there will continue to be people who regard the transgendered as posers.
Avatar photo by Richard Lykes, used with permission.
User avatar
Beutlin
Posts: 390
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:39 am

Re: Is Society Post-Racial? (was "Dolezal and Jenner")

Post by Beutlin »

"All transsexuals rape women’s bodies by reducing the real female form to an artifact, appropriating this body for themselves."

I guess most people would assume that this quote comes from a right-wing (whatever that may mean) perspective. Nothing is further from the truth. It is a quote by American lesbian radical feminist activist Janice Raymond.

On the subject of the relationship between transsexualism and feminism, gender theory (et al.), I found this article in the New Yorker very illuminating. It shows you the complicated nature of transsexualism in feminist theory.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/08/04/woman-2

I should point out that I do not share Raymond's position. I just wanted to include her statement in my post to illustrate the often extremely different viewpoints on this subject.
Faramond
Posts: 2335
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:59 am

Re: Dolezal and Jenner

Post by Faramond »

"All transsexuals rape women’s bodies by reducing the real female form to an artifact, appropriating this body for themselves."

I guess most people would assume that this quote comes from a right-wing (whatever that may mean) perspective.
No conservative would talk or write this way, though. A conservative might criticize transgender persons, sure, but not in a way that sounds like it came out of the "Journal of Deconstructing Identity". Conservatives can be academic, and they can be pretentious, but usually not in the way this quote is.

That article was fascinating and very troubling. The troubling part to me were the numerous examples of persons and groups who will not tolerate dissent at all. The article was littered with examples of the radical feminists being silenced, disinvited, shunned, threatened and boycotted because their views were 'incorrect', in the judgement of people with the power to stifle and end debate. It is appalling anti-intellectual behavior.
Post Reply