Gender differences in conversation

[Queercommie Girl]

Again I'm posting this one here in "chat" since I don't think it's a serious political discussion as such.

Do you think there is a clear and distinct difference in conversational styles which depend on people's gender?

If you were talking to a female, would you use less insults and aggressive words, or would it be basically the same as talking to a male?

I think socialists generally should be as "gender-blind" as possible so personally I probably won't talk to or treat a female differently from a male in terms of conversational style. But what do you think about this?

Just a general question.

[Widerstand]

I can definitely say that I'm not gender blind. I mean I try, but I have little faith I will fully overcome the conditioning.

The insult part depends on the person really, there are some girls around which I swear a lot, and there are some guys around which I barely if ever. However, in general, I'd say I do use less vulgar language when talking to a girl.

[Queercommie Girl]

I can definitely say that I'm not gender blind. I mean I try, but I have little faith I will fully overcome the conditioning.

The insult part depends on the person really, there are some girls around which I swear a lot, and there are some guys around which I barely if ever. However, in general, I'd say I do use less vulgar language when talking to a girl.

Ok.

Would you do the same for a trans-girl?

[leftace53]

I use vulgar language around all things, parents of small children don't appreciate it. I try to be gender blind, but the girls I know just don't want to hang out at home depot with me, and the guys I know don't want to hear about the latest fashion trends. :(

[#FF0000]

Being gender-blind isn't really going to stop sexism or anything.

When I talk to or work with women I generally just try shutting the fuck up every once in awhile.

[Os Cangaceiros]

If you were talking to a female, would you use less insults and aggressive words, or would it be basically the same as talking to a male?

I pretty much speak the same way around people I know, whether male or female. I generally don't use a ton of profanity anyway, though, so...

[revolution inaction]

with me it depends more on how old someone is, how much i know them and how they talk

[ContrarianLemming]

Again I'm posting this one here in "chat" since I don't think it's a serious political discussion as such.

Do you think there is a clear and distinct difference in conversational styles which depend on people's gender?


Not only do I "think" this, it's proven again and again accross cultures and in egalitarian homes.

See wikipedias article on "geneder differences".


I probably won't talk to or treat a female differently from a male in terms of conversational style.

Yeah right, you ain't gonna be scoring anytime soon bud :p

[danyboy27]

i dont know if its sexist but i tend to be more polite with women.

[ContrarianLemming]

i dont know if its sexist but i tend to be more polite with women.

Exactly, me to, and I don't think it's sexist at all. I feel free to insult and jab at my male friends, because that's just how "the guys" are, we take it as nothing, but i would never insult a female friend because women generally don't take it the same way.

[Os Cangaceiros]

i dont know if its sexist but i tend to be more polite with women.

sexist!

[Queercommie Girl]

Yeah right, you ain't gonna be scoring anytime soon bud :p


In case you haven't noticed, I am transgendered and I'm not a man.

I do date women since I am bisexual (trisexual in fact as I'm also open to dating queer people of any gender identity) but "scoring with women" in the masculinist way isn't something that is on my mind a lot.

Please don't jump to conclusions about people's gender identity.

[danyboy27]

sexist!

NOES!!!

But i dont fucking care talking bluntly with my sisters tho.

some kind of non-written rules implanted in my brain telling me to be polite with women, must have something to do with my education, i dunno.

[Queercommie Girl]

Exactly, me to, and I don't think it's sexist at all. I feel free to insult and jab at my male friends, because that's just how "the guys" are, we take it as nothing, but i would never insult a female friend because women generally don't take it the same way.

Personally I favour post-genderism more but it isn't very high up on the priority list among my political agendas. I'm influenced by transhumanist ideas like post-genderism but it's not a very strong influence.

So I don't mind your stance as long as you treat transgendered people in the same way.

[Queercommie Girl]

I pretty much speak the same way around people I know, whether male or female. I generally don't use a ton of profanity anyway, though, so...

It's good to know at least some socialists are pretty much gender-neutral.

[gorillafuck]

If I'm around girls I'm less likely to make obscene jokes. Though I still do a little bit because people who can't tolerate that aren't fun people.

Besides that I talk the same to both genders unless it's a girl I'm interested in in which case I might be more polite.

[Volcanicity]

I think upbringing plays a big part if you are a boy and your dad talkks like shit toeveryone it can rub off .I tend to be polite talking to women.Maybe thats where im gong wrong lol.

[Raúl Duke]

If you were talking to a female, would you use less insults and aggressive words, or would it be basically the same as talking to a male?
hahah

No not really. I use less insults and swear words to certain people but usually has little to do with their gender and more to do with how well I know them, etc.

[Jazzratt]

I can't say I change my behaviour much around women although I try my best to not dominate the conversation (or, as The Best Mod put it I "shut the fuck up once in a while"). Resultantly women who spend their time around me tend to be rude, arrogant fucks just like all my other friends - some less so, some more so.

One of my best friends made me a lovely, hand illustrated christmas card with the words "Merry Christmas, You ****" on the front in bright and cheerful letters. This (and, obviously) other examples make me feel that people who act gentlemanly and moderate their language around women are misguided at best.

That said, I don't make a conscious effort to be gender blind and my approach can sometimes be problomatic. Quite often I've been inadvertantley (genuinely) offensive or a particular woman has taken issue with my behaviour. In these cases I try to modify my behaviour and, if it's something that's been pointed out before, will try to ask people as subtly as possible whether it is genuinely chauvanistic dickery.

[FreeFocus]

I dunno, I might tone it down a little bit around females, but I don't curse a ton. People who curse in every other sentence, or curse so frequently they don't even realize it - it's pretty pathetic, I think.

[Rusty Shackleford]

i say fuck shit balls bastard ass in that order to anyone i meet. ANYONE.

[Pirate Utopian]

I'm my same charming self to everyone I talk to.

[The Fighting_Crusnik]

I usually try to be gender blind unless I know what word to use. In other words, if I know it is a women that is going to wait on me at a restaurant, I refer to her as a Waitress. Otherwise, I just ask a person, if needed, who is going to wait on me :p pretty easy to do...

The only time I'm not gender neutral is when I'm studying German because well... German itself is one hell of a sexist language since Das Mädchen, which means the girl, is using the neuter 'the' rather than 'Die' the feminine girl... and men are referred to as Herr, yet women are referred to as Frau, which literally means woman...

...if I'm wrong, correct me since I'm just learning :laugh:

[Widerstand]

I usually try to be gender blind unless I know what word to use. In other words, if I know it is a women that is going to wait on me at a restaurant, I refer to her as a Waitress. Otherwise, I just ask a person, if needed, who is going to wait on me :p pretty easy to do...

The only time I'm not gender neutral is when I'm studying German because well... German itself is one hell of a sexist language since Das Mädchen, which means the girl, is using the neuter 'the' rather than 'Die' the feminine girl... and men are referred to as Herr, yet women are referred to as Frau, which literally means woman...

...if I'm wrong, correct me since I'm just learning :laugh:

I think you're overinterpreting the retardation that is German grammar ~~ Die Stadt uses a female article. Does that mean cities are supposedly "feminine" in Germany?

[The Fighting_Crusnik]

I think you're overinterpreting the retardation that is German grammar ~~ Die Stadt uses a female article. Does that mean cities are supposedly "feminine" in Germany?


lol, perhaps. But I still don't see the non-sexist sense in referring to a married woman as "Woman" :laugh:

[Widerstand]

lol, perhaps. But I still don't see the non-sexist sense in referring to a married woman as "Woman" :laugh:

What? Bride = Braut, Groom = Bräutigam. After marriage, they are refered to as "Mann und Frau" (Man and Woman). Where do you see sexism in that? Herr and Frau as addresses are the most common form, and yes, Frau means Woman, while Herr means sth along the lines of Mister, but even then, I hardly find anything sexist in that. Maybe it's because I'm a native speaker and got used to addressing people like this, but it seems rather trivial.

[Jazzratt]

People who curse in every other sentence, or curse so frequently they don't even realize it - it's pretty pathetic, I think. I'm not really sure how you work that as being "pathetic". For the most part the people I've encountered who are elitist enough to think that talking normally is "pathetic" are total wankers. Also, for the most part, as far as I know, talking normally includes swearing. Maybe everyone I met is pathetic though and we should all be fucking paragons of etiquitte.

[Il Medico]

I use vulgar language around all things, parents of small children don't appreciate it. I try to be gender blind, but the girls I know just don't want to hang out at home depot with me, and the guys I know don't want to hear about the latest fashion trends. :(
You should come to FL and hang out with me, I love hanging in home depot and talking about fashion. Well, I love talking about fashion anyways.

[Blackscare]

In case you haven't noticed, I am transgendered and I'm not a man.

Then why did you post like three pictures of yourself as a man? I see they're not up anymore, but you had them in your album no more than a month ago.

[BuddhaInBabylon]

This is just my opinion, but i am a true believer in a notion from antiquity that considers the female specie as "the fairer sex." That is to say, I as a male, would not ever cross a certain line with a woman. i.e. calling her names that are less than distinguished, as i am quick to do with my male compatriots. Especially at work.
Like others have said, maybe it's just how i was raised but i think it's best that way. Women deserve respect until they do something to lose it. Dudes have to earn it form the very beginning...I'm afraid that's just how it is with me in the real world. That's not to say theres only one way to earn respect though. Sometimes it's just how you carry yourself, in both regards.

[leftace53]

You should come to FL and hang out with me, I love hanging in home depot and talking about fashion. Well, I love talking about fashion anyways.

:lol: We can talk about Doctor Who instead of doing DIY home renos :lol:

[Il Medico]

:lol: We can talk about Doctor Who instead of doing DIY home renos :lol:
Sounds like a plan. :lol:

[FreeFocus]

I'm not really sure how you work that as being "pathetic". For the most part the people I've encountered who are elitist enough to think that talking normally is "pathetic" are total wankers. Also, for the most part, as far as I know, talking normally includes swearing. Maybe everyone I met is pathetic though and we should all be fucking paragons of etiquitte.

Every other word being a curse is considered talking "normally?" Maybe in your circle of friends. It's pretty obnoxious and immature, actually.

I didn't say don't curse at all. I curse too, it's normal to do it sometimes. But to the point where you don't realize it? That's pretty pathetic, and sad.

[Quail]

I don't think I speak any differently to men and women, but I often feel more comfortable around men for some reason, so maybe that affects how I interact with people. I modify my language more based on the age of the person and how well I know them.

[Adi Shankara]

Men and Women are different, biologically, physically, and emotionally. (OH NO!!!^SEXIST!!!)

Personally, since I'm taken, I'll generally talk to girls like I do anyone else, but if I'm single, then I'll hit on every single straight girl I see who catches my eye.

[9]

I think upbringing plays a big part if you are a boy and your dad talkks like shit toeveryone it can rub off .

The women in my family talk a lot more shit to people than the men. My mother swears like a drunken sailor and I have a grandmother in her nineties who still curses people out over the pettiest shit :)

As far as I know, I don't act differently toward men than I do toward women. I think I probably IRL troll a lot more men than women, but that's mostly because its easier.

[Adi Shankara]

I try to be gender blind, but the girls I know just don't want to hang out at home depot with me, and the guys I know don't want to hear about the latest fashion trends.

Who the fuck hangs out at home depot? :laugh:

[gorillafuck]

Who the fuck hangs out at home depot? :laugh:
That's what I was thinking when I read that.

[NecroCommie]

I rarely talk to anyone except if I have to. But if someone utters something absolutely insufferable then I going to let them hear it, no matter their gender.

[bcbm]

Then why did you post like three pictures of yourself as a man? I see they're not up anymore, but you had them in your album no more than a month ago.

wow you're an asshole

[Achara]

Treating women differently on some bullshit argument that they're the 'fairer' sex amounts to treating them in a patronising and demeaning manner, completly reducing them to their sex. Not swearing around women certainly doesn't oppress women and has little to no effect on the real material oppression that working class women face, but that doesn't mean there isn't sexist underpinnings behind it.

[Queercommie Girl]

Then why did you post like three pictures of yourself as a man? I see they're not up anymore, but you had them in your album no more than a month ago.

If you read my profile you would see that I define myself as genderqueer, which is to say, technically not a man.

Actually ideally I would like to change sex into a woman, but I do not have the practical means to do so at the moment. (Long story, I won't go into it here) So identifying as "genderqueer" is as much a form of "tactics" as my real feeling. Though of course being influenced by post-genderism etc I'm a genderqueer kind of woman anyway, not a stereotypical kind of woman.

I removed the photos following the sound advice of a person I've met in real life from the Trotskyist CWI.

[Queercommie Girl]

wow you're an asshole

Actually to be fair his question there by itself isn't necessarily transphobic, not yet anyway. It seems to be just an objective factual question at this stage.

He is gay himself as far as I know and though LGB transphobia exists, it's not as prevalent or as significant as in the straight community.

Give him a chance, for the time being at least.

[Queercommie Girl]

Men and Women are different, biologically, physically, and emotionally. (OH NO!!!^SEXIST!!!)

Personally, since I'm taken, I'll generally talk to girls like I do anyone else, but if I'm single, then I'll hit on every single straight girl I see who catches my eye.

A lot of the differences are environmentally-induced.

Read this archaeological article for instance, which suggests that back in the days of neolithic primitive communism, there was no significant genderal differentiation in society.

http://www.urkommunismus.de/catalhueyuek_en.html

Individuality and gender relations

The burial objects found in the graves emphasize not only social equality since they differ only marginally concerning their quantity and character (Mellaart 1967: 206) but also confirm the individual differences between persons. The burial objects even vary within one living space (Mellaart 1963: 100f.) and thus rather document differences between individuals than differences due to membership of different classes (Childe 1952: 143-144).
Mellaart could not imagine the societal wealth he found to be generally, equally distributed. Therefore he presumed that the area he excavated was the quarter of the priests, and in the rest of the town circumstances must have been poorer. This was an assumption which could be rejected with good arguments especially after the results of skeleton examinations had been published by Angel in 1971. Already in 1969, it was demonstrated that the collective findings were easier to reconcile with a society without stratification (Narr 1969: 12/2, see esp. Grünert 1982: 194, Hermann 1983: 65-68, and, on the basis of Mellaart's results: Hummel 1996: 269). Hodder's early investigations proved that Çatalhöyük looked everywhere as it did in the area excavated by Mellaart (Hodder 1996b: 360/2-361/1, Balter 1998: 1443/2, Hodder 2003: 10). This means that in Çatalhöyük those differences between people are absent that are so striking in a society divided into classes. Archaeologists accordingly describe this society as egalitarian (Balter 1999: 891/3, Moore 1998) or discuss subtle differences between an egalitarian and a stratified society (for a stratified society: Wason 1994: 153-179, for a society in between: Hodder 1996b: 366/2, for a purely egalitarian society: Hamilton 1996: 262/2). Here, Naomi Hamilton finds the resolving words for this discussion: "Difference need not mean structural inequality. Ranking by age, achieved status, social roles based on skill and knowledge etc. do not necessarily contradict an egalitarian ethos."

The graves in Çatalhöyük already show that a social division of labour was missing since the dead were given tools for various activities of basic production and in each house there were seeds (Connolly 1999: 798/2). However, it can also be seen that people were partially specialized according to their aptitudes in skilled activities that exceeded basic production, from burial objects such as painting utensils or copper (Mellaart 1967: 209). Presumably by producing ceramics, people in Çatalhöyük had discovered how to smelt metallic copper from copper ore, as documented by the preserved slag (Mellaart 1967: 217-218).

There is a striking difference to class societies: burial objects were not produced explicitly for burials, but they rather were goods which people had used during their lives and which were left to them in death (Mellaart 1967: 209). This also holds true for objects which truly are at the end of the "gradual spectrum". Perfectly crafted flint daggers, mirrors sanded from obsidian that were more brilliant than antique metal mirrors (Mellaart 1967: pl. XIV and XII) as well as flawless tools made from obsidian (Hamblin 1975: 17), all of them found in graves: they document both the deployed different preferences and abilities of people who were able to produce them and the respect of their fellow human beings who left these objects to them in their graves instead of retaining them for themselves. Pieces like these led Mellaart to the assumption that they could have been produced in this perfection only by full specialists, particularly since he did not find any midden resulting from production (Mellaart 1967: 211, Balter 1998: 1443/2). During the new excavations specific attention was paid, therefore, to microscopic traces of midden in the clay floors, and domestic waste was analyzed. In this way, evidence could be provided for midden resulting from working on stones. This means that manufacturing stones was not the task of full specialists but was conducted in every household, or associated households in the case of complex production processes that were possible only collectively (Connolly 1999: 798-799, also see Balter 1998: 1443/2 and Hodder 1999: 6/1). Burial objects that were found in a house had been produced and used in that house and been buried with the person who had manufactured and used them. Hodder draws the conclusion that "we cannot argue for total control of production by an elite" (Hodder 1996b: 361/2).
Just like the "living houses" that changed with their inhabitants and were adapted to changing living circumstances, this attachment of people to the objects of daily life conveys an integrated image of organic structures and vital coherences.

Truly outstanding and especially remarkable is the fact that women, too, received tools as burial objects, just as men did (Mellaart 1967: 209) (Footnote:This seems to have held true for neolithic civilizations in general, even for Central European linear pottery culture (linearbandkeramik) (Nordholz 2004: 124). However, this interrelation rarely seems to be observed. (http://www.urkommunismus.de/catalhueyuek_en.html#_ftn6) 6). In later class societies, men (of the "middle classes") received burial objects that allowed conclusions as to their profession but women's graves contained only jewellery: rich women were given rich jewellery, poor women poor jewellery. That these women worked just as hard - if not even harder - than men is not reflected in the burial objects. The tools in neolithic women graves illustrate that women were recognized as equals as a matter of course in the production of goods. This, in turn, supports the assumption that in this society the antagonism between production and reproduction was abolished. There are mural paintings in Çatalhöyük that complement and confirm this assumption; they show men dancing with children (Mellaart 1966: pl. LIV, LV, LIX, LXI), a motif that does not occur in class society until the 13th century B.C. and also later only led a shadowy existence. Also, in contrast to Mellaart's statement, not only women were buried with children but men also (Hamilton 1996: 253/1).


However, not only were women buried with tools but also men were buried with jewellery, partially with considerable amounts (Hamilton 1996: 262) (Fussnote:Mellaart's converse argument stems from the fact that he frequently determined the sex of the skeletons according to their grave goods (!). It was only after Angel's anatomical examinations of the skeletons six years after that the true facts were revealed (Hamilton 1996: 245/2, 258/2). (http://www.urkommunismus.de/catalhueyuek_en.html#_ftn7) 7). Naomi Hamilton who in Hodder's team is responsible for working with the graves and therefore for analyzing gender relations, doubts if the definition of a social gender apart from biological sex is at all helpful in the discussion on Çatalhöyük. She regards the concept of gender as bound to our times and their problems and considers the possibility that neolithic humans did not perceive man and woman as being a polarity (Hamilton 1996: 262). Indeed, already in 1990 Hodder developed the thought that the decisive polarity for neolithic perception may have been of a different nature (Hodder 1990). It is interesting that more recent considerations lead to an analogous assumption concerning the Palaeolithic (Heidefrau 2004). The author, Elke Heidefrau, writes: "Possibly, the discussion on gender ... mainly reveals something about our own culture: a culture in which it seems immensely important to know sex of another person (see the first question asked after the birth of a child). To us, a culture in which this is not the case seems almost unthinkable; therefore, such thoughts could open new horizons to us and thus enrich the current gender discussion!" (Heidefrau 2004: 148; translated). Obviously, at that time the real individuals were at the centre, and when they liked to adorn themselves their jewellery was not taken away from them when they died - regardless of their sex. And it was people who produced, possessed and used tools and therefore also kept them in their graves - again, regardless of their sex.

Hodder dedicated a separate publication to gender relations in order to refute the older conceptions of a matriarchy in Çatalhöyük (Hodder 2004). In this article in "Scientific American" he presents an impressive documentation of gender equality in Çatalhöyük: there were no significant differences concerning nutrition, body height and life style between men and women. Men and women performed very similar tasks, as can be deduced from the abrasion of bones. Both sexes stayed in and outside the house equally long and were equally active in the kitchen as in tool production. There are no hints pointing to a gender-related division of labour. It is only from artwork that one can deduce that outside the house, men hunted whereas women engaged in agriculture (cf. Hodder). Mural paintings show, however, women together with men in depictions of chase, as published in Mellaart's excavation reports (Mellaart 1966: Pl LIIb, LVIb, LXIIb). And the equal burial of men and women sealed equality even in death.


What this evidence suggests is that actually a lot of gender inequality is a product of class society itself. Which means we should expect a socialist society without class to be significantly gender-equal than a class-based capitalist society.


Of course, this is not to say that there aren't any biological differences between men and women, or that everything about gender is simply socially constructed. Such a view would be a post-modernist one.


However, gender issues aren't philosophically speaking directly based on biology, not because there aren't any biological differences, but it's due to the fact that biological differences wouldn't necessarily imply that men and women should be treated differently in many ways. Indeed, one could make the point that in many things men and women should be treated the same despite the biological differences.


Another thing is that scientifically speaking transgenderism does have a biological basis, therefore by the same logic, there should be ground to treat transgendered people somewhat "different" (though no doubt no differently in many ways) too.

Another problem with imposing a rigid gender role onto society is that you are going to have problems with people who don't fit into the rigid gender role so well, and practical experience tells me that there are actually many people like that. It would not be democratic to impose some kind of overall standard on anything on everyone, including a genderal standard. And as someone who is an ally of Trotskyism, I strongly believe that a socialism without democracy is not socialism at all.

[Blackscare]

wow you're an asshole

I wasn't trying to be a dick but he posted pictures of himself as a man. I was confused.

IDK I figure if I was transexual I would post pictures of myself in my current form :blink:

I can see how I came off as a dick, sorry.

[edit]

Also, after read Isuel's post a few up, I realized that there is a whole lot more nuance to it than I had thought. I wasn't aware of this term "genderqueer" and now that I understand it in context I see why I was an asshole. Sorry :(

[Queercommie Girl]

I wasn't trying to be a dick but he posted pictures of himself as a man. I was confused.

IDK I figure if I was transexual I would post pictures of myself in my current form :blink:

I can see how I came off as a dick, sorry.

But what if currently one does not have the means to change sex?

Also, being genderqueer technically isn't being a man either, though physically a genderqueer person may look just like a man. I know a queer person who defines as genderqueer, he is biologically male and has no interest in changing sex physically. He is a leader in the LGBT youth movement here in the UK and politically he is a left-green.

Which goes to show that gender and sex aren't exactly the same thing.

[Blackscare]

I edited that post a bit Isuel, by the way.

Sorry to come off as insensitive.

[Queercommie Girl]

I edited that post a bit Isuel, by the way.

Sorry to come off as insensitive.

Don't worry about it, I think your original question was largely a neutral one anyway.

I don't think LGBT people should become overly sensitive and start jumping at every question directed at them.

[Invincible Summer]

The only time I'm not gender neutral is when I'm studying German because well... German itself is one hell of a sexist language since Das Mädchen, which means the girl, is using the neuter 'the' rather than 'Die' the feminine girl... and men are referred to as Herr, yet women are referred to as Frau, which literally means woman...

...if I'm wrong, correct me since I'm just learning :laugh:


Um... I think you're thinking wayyyyy too hard about this. Any language with genders will have "woman" = _______. The word ________ will "literally mean" woman. That's just the way we translate the words.

I don't see how that's anymore sexist than English using the word "woman" to refer to women. It's just the goddamn word that the language uses!

[Queercommie Girl]

This is just my opinion, but i am a true believer in a notion from antiquity that considers the female specie as "the fairer sex." That is to say, I as a male, would not ever cross a certain line with a woman. i.e. calling her names that are less than distinguished, as i am quick to do with my male compatriots. Especially at work.
Like others have said, maybe it's just how i was raised but i think it's best that way. Women deserve respect until they do something to lose it. Dudes have to earn it form the very beginning...I'm afraid that's just how it is with me in the real world. That's not to say theres only one way to earn respect though. Sometimes it's just how you carry yourself, in both regards.

I don't really agree with you but I agree that everyone can in principle lose other people's respect through their own actions.

[Adi Shankara]

A lot of the differences are environmentally-induced.

No, I was talking literal difference. women are literally (and not just gender-wise) different from Men biologically (duh), emotionally (duh), and physically (duh), and vice versa.

these aren't gender-based; it's been proven that women have different emotional patterns than men, due to higher amounts of estrogen and other hormones that generally create more "nurturing" traits.

I don't see how this is controversial. to say that women and men are exactly the same in the way we think (remember, hormones effect the way we think very much) look, or behave biologically is ridiculous.

and before I get the expected accusation of sexism, notice I'm not calling for an enforcement of gender stereotypes. how a woman (or man) wants to behave, dress, or act (or be treated) should be left up to the individual. My girl prefers to be traditionally feminine and acts like a retro-housewife, I prefer to be the more active, belligerent player in our relationship (she works, and I'm tutoring for extra money).

[Queercommie Girl]

No, I was talking literal difference. women are literally (and not just gender-wise) different from Men biologically (duh), emotionally (duh), and physically (duh), and vice versa.

these aren't gender-based; it's been proven that women have different emotional patterns than men, due to higher amounts of estrogen and other hormones that generally create more "nurturing" traits.

I don't see how this is controversial. to say that women and men are exactly the same in the way we think (remember, hormones effect the way we think very much) look, or behave biologically is ridiculous.

and before I get the expected accusation of sexism, notice I'm not calling for an enforcement of gender stereotypes. how a woman (or man) wants to behave, dress, or act (or be treated) should be left up to the individual. My girl prefers to be traditionally feminine and acts like a retro-housewife, I prefer to be the more active, belligerent player in our relationship (she works, and I'm tutoring for extra money).


But I never said that men and women have no biological differences, if you care to actually read my post in some detail.

And actually it's not just due to hormones, but also the way the brain is wired. And it has been shown for example that transgendered people have brains that are wired similarly to the sex they wish to change into. In fact, I think the "brain factor" is more fundamental than hormones. So actually a MtF trans-sexual for instance would tend to "think more like a woman" even before she undergoes hormonal therapy and any kind of surgery, which is why trans-women should actually be treated as women if they really identify themselves as such, even if they have not taken hormones yet.

So no, actually I never said men and women are exactly the same. For someone who seriously supports trans activism like me, such a stance would actually be illogical. Since hypothetically in a world where men and women are exactly the same, the whole concept of transgenderism would become completely moot. What is a transgendered person changing from and changing into?

However, in principle I'm influenced by transhumanism and post-genderism, so actually I think abolishing gender differences even in the literal sense in the future isn't impossible at all. But that's a different topic.

The issue here is that humans are qualitatively not just animals. To think of humans as if they are animals is a form of social darwinism, which is reactionary. The qualitative difference between humans and animals is something that is very explicit in Marxism-Leninism. So despite the objective biological differences, there is still very much the question of how such differences are manifested at the social level. Humans are not dictated by instinct, humans have self-consciousness, which is the psychological basis for freedom, and we can decide whether to exaggerate or downplay inherent biological differences. And the social manifestation of gender (not literal biological sex) is very much environmentally-induced.

Furthermore, there is also a lot of historical and archaeological evidence which shows that in primitive communist societies, the distinction between the genders wasn't so clear-cut. (See for instance the article I provided above, which is a serious scientific analysis formally directly quoted by the CWI political magazine last year) This shows that gender inequality, to a significant extent, is a product of class society. If you wish to dispute this, at least examine the evidence first, I am a scientific socialist and I don't like dogmas at the expense of real evidence.

And of course, people must have the right to not be limited by a rigid gender framework, which is an important democratic principle. And I completely agree with the Trotskyists that socialism without democracy isn't socialism at all.

[Queercommie Girl]

I do agree however that the so-called "traditionally feminine roles" aren't in themselves intrinsically inferior, they are only inferior if they are imposed on women.

To say that "traditional feminine roles" are intrinsically inferior is what I would call sexism of the second order. That is to say, not sexism directly towards women, but sexism towards all things that are considered to be "feminine" and "womanly". It's like saying "the only politically correct way for a woman to behave is for her to behave like a man", which is a form of what is called masculinism, the idea that in the abstract sense, masculinity is intrinsically superior to femininity, which is basically wrong.

[Adi Shankara]

I do agree however that the so-called "traditionally feminine roles" aren't in themselves intrinsically inferior, they are only inferior if they are imposed on women.

To say that "traditional feminine roles" are intrinsically inferior is what I would call sexism of the second order. That is to say, not sexism directly towards women, but sexism towards all things that are considered to be "feminine" and "womanly". It's like saying "the only politically correct way for a woman to behave is for her to behave like a man", which is a form of what is called masculinism, the idea that in the abstract sense, masculinity is intrinsically superior to femininity, which is basically wrong.

I disagree. I have a girlfriend who loves doing housework, her greatest ideal in life is to have 5 kids and be a housewife and to be able to cook dinner for her future husband. She is super intelligent and is going to university, but she is still really "traditional" like that.

to say she is inferior because she wants to live like that, that is sexist in itself.

I don't know if you mean "imposed" in a literal sense, because I agree, such a lifestyle should be left up to the choice of the individual, but if a woman wants to be a housewife (just like if a man wants to be a stay-at-home), then I don't see what the problem is.

[Queercommie Girl]

I disagree. I have a girlfriend who loves doing housework, her greatest ideal in life is to have 5 kids and be a housewife and to be able to cook dinner for her future husband. She is super intelligent and is going to university, but she is still really "traditional" like that.

to say she is inferior because she wants to live like that, that is sexist in itself.

I don't know if you mean "imposed" in a literal sense, because I agree, such a lifestyle should be left up to the choice of the individual, but if a woman wants to be a housewife (just like if a man wants to be a stay-at-home), then I don't see what the problem is.

Hey, sorry if this sounds somewhat offensive, but is English your second language or something?

Read what I posted again. I very explicitly said that I do agree however that the so-called "traditionally feminine roles" aren't in themselves intrinsically inferior, not that they are inferior.

Get it?

Otherwise what do you think my point about masculinism and sexism of the second order meant?

Also, out of interest, what is your stance on transgenderism? I don't want to sound overly sensitive, but sometimes I get the impression that some posters like to avoid this topic for some reason. I think talking a bit about trans issues is quite on topic in a thread like this.

[leftace53]

Who the fuck hangs out at home depot? :laugh:


That's what I was thinking when I read that.


:crying::crying: I do...

[ContrarianLemming]

In case you haven't noticed, I am transgendered and I'm not a man.

I do date women since I am bisexual (trisexual in fact as I'm also open to dating queer people of any gender identity) but "scoring with women" in the masculinist way isn't something that is on my mind a lot.

Please don't jump to conclusions about people's gender identity.

To be fair, that's completely unexpected.

[piet11111]

I am always polite to everyone at the start and if i notice they do not mind me being less then proper then i quickly lower my verbal standards.
(yeah i love using big words to get the :blink: look when they see me in my cheap ass clothes like some hick)

Also women tend to be worse then men so don't bother sugarcoating your language.

[Adi Shankara]

Hey, sorry if this sounds somewhat offensive, but is English your second language or something?

Actually it is. (spoken Russian is my first language)



Also, out of interest, what is your stance on transgenderism? I don't want to sound overly sensitive, but sometimes I get the impression that some posters like to avoid this topic for some reason. I think talking a bit about trans issues is quite on topic in a thread like this.

I have no opinion on transgenders people beyond that I'm against their discrimination and support their legal rights to equality. otherwise, I don't usually see people in a less or more favorable light because of their gender.

[Queercommie Girl]

Actually it is. (spoken Russian is my first language)


It's also my second language, my first language is Chinese.

Ok, so you understand how you mis-read me, right? My point was that the so-called "traditional feminine roles" aren't necessarily intrinsically inferior.



I have no opinion on transgenders people beyond that I'm against their discrimination and support their legal rights to equality. otherwise, I don't usually see people in a less or more favorable light because of their gender.All right, fair enough. I think not discriminating people on the basis of their gender is a positive trait.

[Queercommie Girl]

To be fair, that's completely unexpected.


Don't worry about it, it's not your fault.

[black magick hustla]

depends. if i dont want to have sex with a girl i prolly treat her the same as every other dude. except i prolly troll them more

[Ele'ill]

I can't say I change my behaviour much around women although I try my best to not dominate the conversation (or, as The Best Mod put it I "shut the fuck up once in a while"). Resultantly women who spend their time around me tend to be rude, arrogant fucks just like all my other friends - some less so, some more so.

One of my best friends made me a lovely, hand illustrated christmas card with the words "Merry Christmas, You ****" on the front in bright and cheerful letters. This (and, obviously) other examples make me feel that people who act gentlemanly and moderate their language around women are misguided at best.

I would expect nothing less from England. (If you're insulted by this that means you're a nationalist)


I talk to people in a way I think they can relate. There are women and men that respond identically to certain speech or rhetoric.

I'm not sure it has anything to do with gender but perhaps has more to do with what you're trying to accomplish. Are you interested in fucking the person? Dating the person? Befriending the person? Belittling to the point of suicide, the person?


As for the england comment- I've never been to england but I have dealt with people who have- their culture is brutal but brutal is fun and they're no less caring than anyone else- they'll just bottle you as the bars are closing more readily :lol:

This is in comparison to the United States where a 'scuffle' will land you in jail with various charges.

[Jazzratt]

As for the england comment- I've never been to england but I have dealt with people who have- their culture is brutal but brutal is fun and they're no less caring than anyone else- they'll just bottle you as the bars are closing more readily :lol: Let's be fair, we don't shoot at each other as much as the yanks do.

[Queercommie Girl]

That is a good point. I think the individualistic "cowboy gun culture" is more petit-bourgeois than proletarian.

I live in England. I find that British workers are more collectivist and have more sense of solidarity compared with US workers. Partly it might be due to the fact that Britain has a longer and stronger tradition of socialism and labour activism compared with the US.

[Bilan]

Depends on the person.

[Il Medico]

I treat stranger in a semi-friendly, yet not overly familiar way, regardless of gender. If I am friend with some one, I joke/kid with them as much as they are comfortable with, again, regardless of gender. Girls and guys I find attractive I tend to be nicer to, yes.