You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Any measure you use to split the human race into purely Male and purely Female, has exceptions. Chromosome, genitals, hormonal… and beyond all the overly simple understanding of biology… what people know in themselves they are.
The intersex and transexual issues are separate, but people seeking to stamp a biological norm of “everyone is born (or even more mistakenly, conceived) as male or female” as a starting point for discussion about people identified as male/female at birth, but later wishing to live as female/male, are using dangerous over simplification.
I said it before, I'm going to say it again: mammals cannot change sex.
Cougar's argument seems to boil down to: "but if they could change sex then they would have changed sex".
If someone identified as male at birth wants to present themselves in what they consider to be a feminine manner that's fine. If they want to use a name that is usually given to females that's fine. If they want to use pronouns usually used to describe the other sex that's fine... but they cannot change sex.
'Transwomen are women' is a fashionable phrase at the moment, but it's not true. Transwomen are men who would like to present as, and be treated as, what they consider to be a womanly way.
I'm usually polite, and I have no reason not to go along with this. I only object when people tell me I have to believe that men can become women to vice versa.
I only object when people tell me I have to believe that men can become women to vice versa.
This is the faith/religious argument I've put forward before. I absolutely defend anyones right to believe in any religion they want, but they do not have the right to expect me to believe in it too. I will be accommodating when possible (like not having the TV on when the MiL visits on a Sunday as that is against her beliefs), but, harping back to molgrips road analogy, if someone crosses the white line and is now facing the oncoming traffic, they can't expect everyone else to change direction too.
How much of this could solved by just treating people like people and not giving a flying cabbage about their gender? Makes no difference if someone identifies as an axolotl, a trans man or he man, as long as they ain’t a pita.
You can’t define what gender is, can’t explain how it’s measured, yet can confidently state that it’s assigned at the point of conception?
I googled. I can't believe you need me to explain to you how babies are made! Gender *is* determined at conception.
Those rare people who don’t fit either that you talk about, which box do they go into?
If they have some kind of abnormality that leaves them neither male nor female then (as far as I can find) they have no gender, as far as I can find there are no additional genders for those who don't fit either gender. If you have discovered otherwise feel free to post a link from a credible source and I will thank you and concede the point. The fact you haven't already done so strongly suggests you've found nothing.
As Samuel Johnson said: "To revenge reasonable incredulity by refusing evidence, is a degree of insolence with which the world is not yet acquainted; and stubborn audacity is the last refuge of guilt."
IMV, if you could back up your assertion you'd already have done it.
How much of this could solved by just treating people like people and not giving a flying cabbage about their gender? Makes no difference if someone identifies as an axolotl, a trans man or he man, as long as they ain’t a pita.
Does anyone give a flying cabbage about gender?
Sex, however? Well, sex is one the protected characteristics defined in the Equality Act. Gender Reassignment (not Gender Identity) is another.
The Equality Act allows for single-sex and separate services for men and women, e.g. Only women can be a mammogram nurse. People with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) can still be excluded from single-sex services.
If they have some kind of abnormality that leaves them neither male nor female then (as far as I can find) they have no gender
The are still either male or female.
The are still either male or female.
So, we’re ignoring all the difficult decisions made when having to chose what to put on the birth certificate? At what point is the male/female decision set in stone? When the medical staff choose, or when the operations are complete, or when the certificate is signed? What happens when the baby grows up to challenge the decision?
There is rarely a difficult decision. biological sex is observed by skilled medical, nursing and midwifery professionals.
To quote an article from the Wall Street Journal by an evolutionary and developmental biologist.
'In humans, reproductive anatomy is unambiguously male or female at birth more than 99.98 per cent of the time.'
In advanced healthcare systems there is followup for the remainder. A 'placeholder' is used until the matter is resolved. 'Operations' would not change the biological sex of the baby. Changing a birth certificate does appear to change legal/administrative sex however, unless there was an earlier, genuine error the individuals biological sex remains unchanged.
Cougar’s argument seems to boil down to: “but if they could change sex then they would have changed sex”.
Rather my 'argument' is to challenge over-simplistic and logically inconsistent arguments. For instance,
If they have some kind of abnormality that leaves them neither male nor female then (as far as I can find) they have no gender
... this is progress, we've now finally admitted that there are at least three states: male / female / other, something that was deemed impossible three pages ago.
I only object when people tell me I have to believe that men can become women to vice versa.
Do me a favour. There was an episode of Naked Attraction recently, possibly the final episode of the previous series, where one of the contestants was a trans woman. Please, go watch it, then tell me if you then stand by that statement.
if someone crosses the white line and is now facing the oncoming traffic, they can’t expect everyone else to change direction too.
But in this increasingly inappropriate analogy they don't want everyone else to change direction / sides. Rather they want to be able to be left alone to be on whichever side they like. This is the gay marriage argument all over again, it's not suddenly going to become mandatory you know.
Do me a favour. There was an episode of Naked Attraction recently, possibly the final episode of the previous series, where one of the contestants was a trans woman. Please, go watch it, then tell me if you then stand by that statement.
I don’t need to watch it - Men cannot become women, women cannot become men. I assume you mean the transwomen looked like a women, which I am quite prepared to believe. Still, men cannot become women.
Rather they want to be able to be left alone to be on whichever side they like
Which is fine & very much as it should be. However... At some point their preference has an impact on other members of society. Most obviously in sport, but also with the question of them gaining access to protected 'women only' spaces. That is when the problem arises as to whether they have in fact become women, or whether the way in which they were socialized & the ongoing effects of their biology make them different. As you say.. it's complicated.
… this is progress, we’ve now finally admitted that there are at least three states: male / female / other, something that was deemed impossible three pages ago.
To further quote an article from the Wall Street Journal by an evolutionary and developmental biologist, both credible! A bit wordy, but presents balanced description.
'In humans, as in most animals or plants, an organism’s biological sex corresponds to one of two distinct types of reproductive anatomy that develop for the production of small or large sex cells — spe*m and eggs, respectively — and associated biological functions in sexual reproduction. In humans, reproductive anatomy is unambiguously male or female at birth more than 99.98 per cent of the time.
The evolutionary function of these two anatomies is to aid in reproduction via the fusion of spe*m and ova. No third type of sex cell exists in humans, and therefore there is no sex spectrum or additional sexes beyond male and female. Sex is binary.
There is a difference, however, between the statements that there are only two sexes (true) and that everyone can be neatly categorised as male or female (false). The existence of only two sexes does not mean sex is never ambiguous. But intersex individuals are extremely rare, and they are neither a third sex nor proof that sex is a spectrum or a social construct.
Not everyone needs to be discretely assignable to one or the other sex for biological sex to be functionally binary. To assume otherwise — to confuse secondary sexual traits with biological sex itself — is a category error.'
Humans tend to think/talk forever about sex, even when discussing gender 😉
I don’t need to watch it – Men cannot become women, women cannot become men
Yes they can. Note the thread title.
I don’t need to watch it – Men cannot become women, women cannot become men
Yes they can. Note the thread title.
No, they can't. A man is an adult human male, a woman is an adult human female. Pick other words, those are taken.
No, they can’t. A man is an adult human male, a woman is an adult human female. Pick other words, those are taken.
Yes they can. As the law says.
No, they can’t. A man is an adult human male, a woman is an adult human female. Pick other words, those are taken.
Yes they can. As the law says.
A legal fiction. They haven't actually changed sex.
Oh look, our resident transphobe.
A legal fiction. They haven’t actually changed sex.
I didn't say they had. Again, note the thread title.
ransos
Play nicely. It's been quite civilised so far, there was no call for that comment
... and no they can't 😉
ransos
Play nicely. It’s been quite civilised so far, there was no call for that comment
… and no they can’t 😉
Aimed at binners, sorry.
And yes they can. Because they do.
No third type of sex cell exists in humans
No-one suggested they did. This is a discussion about gender, not sperm.
No-one suggested they did. This is a discussion about gender, not sperm.
Yes it is, so why do you keep conflating sex with gender. When people keep saying 'there are two genders', they mean 'there are two sexes'. Because sex and gender are used interchangeably, the conversation goes around and around in circles.
ransos
I guess if you're arguing about the definition of the word 'woman' then you have a point -though not one I'd agree with.
The definition of 'woman' for me is an adult human female. Males cannot become female, so men cannot become women.
I think your definition of women includes transwomen, so for you it stands to reason that men can become women.
Your legal argument also depends upon how you look at it. Yes, the law says a person can get a GRC and should be treated for most purposes as their new gender (I hate the word gender, as I said earlier I don't really know what it means). To me that's like the inquisition ruling that the Sun moves round the Earth - the law says it, but that doesn't make it true.
Sorry, I'll have to bow out for a bit, that doesn't mean I won't read and consider any reply.
Yes it is, so why do you keep conflating sex with gender.
Clumsiness in typing mostly.
It's complicated. Who knew.
The definition of ‘woman’ for me is an adult human female. Males cannot become female, so men cannot become women.
The key there is 'for me'. I don't think that the subject can or should be reduced to chromosomes.
Still here:
The key is also 'for you' - we're arguing about what words mean to us.
I'd say the subject is 'biology' for me rather than 'chromosomes', and I don't think it's a 'reduction', biology is HUGE! I think it's a reduction to say that someones sex depends upon how they feel - a woman or man is more than a feeling in your head: they are real, tangible, physical things that evolution has miraculously produced - that's not a reduction, it's the greatest thing that's ever happened on our planet.
a woman or man is more than a feeling in your head
What do you mean by ‘A feeling in your head’?
Have to be quick:
some people seem to argue that 'if you feel like a woman then you are a woman, even if you are in a male body'. I disagree with that. I think we are our bodies, that's all we've got. If you are in a male body then you're a man, if female then you're a woman. I don't think that's a 'reduction'.
How someone behaves, and presents, and wants to be treated is entirely separate from this (I guess that's what all the 'gender' stuff is, but I don't know how women are 'suuposed to behave' or how they are 'supposed to look').
A very interesting topic.
Current scientific definitions are not the end of the line, just like laws or social views, the more we understand scientifically the more likely new definitions will be backed by scientific research.
You can use current definitions to be 'right' in some way but real peepoles are telling you those definitions are way too simplistic for them. It doesn't seem complicated to me. Let us consider describing gender/sex/race/ism's etc etc as HUMAN. Everything fits that box very neatly 🙂
if you feel like a woman then you are a woman, even if you are in a male body’. I disagree with that.
I disagree with that also. But I don't think that's what anyone is actually saying, outside of red-tops claiming that's what people are saying in order to erupt a bit of fury and sell a few papers.
It's complicated. Who'd have thought.
If you are in a male body then you’re a man, if female then you’re a woman.
So if a man changes their body to be a female body you're happy that they're a woman then?
It's com- oh I can't be bothered any more. You really should watch that show I asked you to watch. Spin to the end, it'll be five minutes of your time. Why not humour me?
Let me try another angle.
Would you tell a homosexual person that they can't really be gay, men like women and women like men, that's just biology? Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve?
We are at a point now with gender identity and transsexualism where we were with homosexuality what, 20, 30 years ago? You don't get it, and that's fine, but you really should talk to people for whom this affects in rather a big way. Except you can't because you've driven away those people in (girlie) tears by shouting things like "you can't possibly be a woman, you were born with a penis, hah, QED!"
There's a particularly evil sub-narrative which suggests that trans women are really just men who've woken up one day and gone "if I call myself a woman and put on a frock I can get a bit rapey in toilets" and this couldn't be farther from the truth, any more than being homosexual makes you a predatory paedo.
I have a tree in my living room. I mean, it identifies as a table, but it's biologically a tree and can't be anything else, leading botanists have said so.
So if a man changes their body to be a female body you’re happy that they’re a woman then?
Sigh yourself - a man cannot change his body to be a female body. He can change it so it superficially appears to be what a female body is 'supposed to look like', but that does not make it female.
Would you tell a homosexual person that they can’t really be gay
No.
Would you tell a white person they can be black?
Offensive? No more than your question to me.
You really should watch that show I asked you to watch. Spin to the end, it’ll be five minutes of your time. Why not humour me?
I'm not sure what you think this will prove. I'm happy to accept that surgery and drugs can make a male body look like a female body (with the caveat, of course, that female bodies come in many different types.)
Surgery could probably make a cat look like a rabbit, but it would still be a cat.
that does not make it female.
What does then, in your opinion?
Would you tell a white person they can be black?
Michael Jackson had a good go at the opposite.
That's a very interesting question though. I guess again were back to definitions, what does it mean to be black or white? I mean, superficially it's just skin colour, bleaching agents or pigments could cover that. Most of the civilised world doesn't differentiate - at least officially - between the two when it comes to things like toilets or sports (two things cited a couple of pages back), you don't get black-only events in the Olympics. So the difference is, what, cultural?
I think I might need to sleep on that, there's a lot to unpick there.
I’m not sure what you think this will prove.
Not trying to prove anything really, it's just a discussion. I'm mostly interested in what your thoughts are on it afterwards.
I’m happy to accept that surgery and drugs can make a male body look like a female body (with the caveat, of course, that female bodies come in many different types.)
But if your starting point was a female brain in a male body...?
Surgery could probably make a cat look like a rabbit, but it would still be a cat.
Are you trying to out-silly my tree? (-:
Would you tell a homosexual person that they can’t really be gay, men like women and women like men, that’s just biology? Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve?
We are at a point now with gender identity and transsexualism where we were with homosexuality what, 20, 30 years ago? You don’t get it, and that’s fine, but you really should talk to people for whom this affects in rather a big way. Except you can’t because you’ve driven away those people in (girlie) tears by shouting things like “you can’t possibly be a woman, you were born with a penis, hah, QED!”
People this affects, you mean like women and gay people who are fed up with this?
Stonewall:
1. Actively campaigned for the removal of same-sex exemptions in the Equality Act.
2. Are misleading people about protected characteristics in the Equality Act.
3. Are trying to redefine homosexuality as same-gender attraction, not same-sex attraction.
4. They are championing an affirmation-only pathway for children struggling with their gender identity. Historically, 85% of those children desist and would have grown up to be be happy, healthy gays. Once puberty blockers* are involved, hardly any desist.
* off-label cancer drugs also used to treat precocious puberty in girls. There are class action lawsuits by women who were prescribed these drugs to treat precocious puberty, many (only in their early 30s) now suffering osteoporosis.
The GRA was created to help a very small number of people. The numbers of people claiming trans identities has skyrocketed. Most people think the 'trans' in 'trans rights' means 'transsexual'. It doesn't, it is now much broader (see Stonewall's trans umbrella) and including, for example, transvestites (men who dress as women for a sexual thrill).
Vancouver Rape Relief Shelter has been de-funded for only accepting biological women. The campaign to de-fund the shelter was lead by the politician Morgane Oger (a trans woman).
I understand you are coming from a position of wanted to be kind but there is much, much more to this than you seem to realise.
Check out these people on twitter (all transmen or transwomen) for a different perspective.
Buck Angel, Fionne Orlander, Blaire White, Rose of Dawn, Debbie Hayton, Kristina Harrison
peace out (before I get banned)
Just re-reading your post and it seems a bit nasty to me.
you really should talk to people for whom this affects in rather a big way
Women? Yes, lets ask them what they think of this. Or did you mean just men who would like to be considered as women - do the women not count?
Except you can’t because you’ve driven away those people in (girlie) tears by shouting things like “you can’t possibly be a woman, you were born with a penis, hah
As far as I'm aware I've never shouted at a trans person. And I would tread very carefully if I was aware I was discussing this with someone trans, but yes, ultimately I think that you cannot be a woman if you were born in a male body (you, not me, reduced this to 'a penis')
There’s a particularly evil sub-narrative which suggests that trans women are really just men who’ve woken up one day and gone “if I call myself a woman and put on a frock I can get a bit rapey in toilets”
Why have you addressed this to me? Have I suggested anywhere that I think anything like this? Have you put it in as a kind of straw-man argument as it's easier to argue against this than anything I've actually said.
In fact, has anyone said anything like this anywhere on this thread? (That's a genuine question, btw, it's possible I missed it).
As it happens the reason I think about this a lot is that pretty much my best friend is FtM trans. He identified as a lesbian for most of the time I've known him. I treat him as I would any man, I use the pronouns he prefers (usually - I often, embarrassingly, forget), we still go to football matches together. He's the same person he always was ...
... I don't know why I'm telling you this really. Certainly not as a 'some of my best friends are trans' type argument. I guess it's just that the changes he's made to his body have made no difference to me. He acts just as he always did, like - in my opinion - a laddy girl.
The saddest thing is he cannot find a partner now. He was quite successful at pulling as a lesbian, but people who like men seem to want an actual male body rather than one that has been surgically and medicinally altered.
Sorry if you found my previous posts offensive, I don't usually argue like that - I think it's because of the accusatory tone of your posts. In the end I don't think we're going to agree, and the arguments seem to get sillier as the go on (a cat that looks like a rabbit ffs).
I can’t help thinking that gender stereotypes have become more extreme in the past decade or 2. I’ve spent my life resisting suggestions that I ‘should’ be more feminine, that I’m a ‘bloke’, that I should dress a certain way, that I should have a nice handbag, that I shouldn’t swear, that I should find a nice feminine hobby instead of mountain biking..... but I don’t doubt that I’m a woman.
I think gender stereotyping is really unhelpful.
@rainper
I'd just like to say I'm glad you're here - you and clarkpm4242 are arguing much more clearly than me. I'm glad somebody is writing what I think better than I can.
Why have you addressed this to me?
In fact, has anyone said anything like this anywhere on this thread?
the accusatory tone of your posts
None of those things were my intention, I wasn't 'directing' any of that and I'm genuinely sorry if you thought I did. I wasn't talking about you or about here particularly, I often use the word "you" generically to mean "one" or "people" and I really should be more careful about my choice of words.
He acts just as he always did, like – in my opinion – a laddy girl.
Does he approve of that description?
The rest of those last two posts, it's 11pm and I'm too tired to field all that lot right now. I'll come back to it.
99.98 per cent of the time
That’s one in 5000 incidence. That is far more common than you might think. Nowhere near a “rare” disease. About one every three days in the U.K. then.
vickypea
I agree 100%.
I've always got on well with women who do not dress or act in a stereotypically feminine way (I had tough sisters, I think that's what did it).
If you look at pop stars from a few decades ago: Siouxsie Sioux, Marc Almond, Boy George, Poly Styrene, Bowie, Joan Jett, Spandau Ballet, etc. etc. they were not constrained by stereotypical gender behaviour - they acted and dressed how they wanted.
Many pop stars now seem to muscley blokes with short hair, or giggly girls with long blonde hair and miniskirts (there are, of course, exceptions).
Keep swearing and keep riding, there are people out there who will love you for it.
Does he approve of that description?
God no, I'd never say that to him.
... actually, we get on so well I'd probably get away with it. I was sometimes quite rude about lesbians back in the day, he seemed to take it in the right spirit. But no, I think it would hurt him deep down if I of all people said that.
I think gender stereotyping is really unhelpful.
Typical woman.
(-:
God no, I’d never say that to him.
...
I think it would hurt him deep down
But you don't think he's a real man. So it's OK to share those views on STW (where other trans folk may be reading) but not to your bestest friend?
Do you see where I'm coming from now?
No, I don't think he's 'really' male. I think he's a female who has altered his body with surgery and drugs to approximate in some ways a male body.
If I was talking to my 'bestest friend' about this we'd be talking about him specifically - that's very different from talking about things in general.
Are you really suggesting I shouldn't share my views in case someone is hurt by them? We're going to have very limited conversations if that's the rule.
I do agree - and said so earlier on - that STW might not be the best place to discuss this, but if the discussion is taking place then I'll be a part of it.
Many women find it offensive that trans women say they are women. Are you worried about these women reading this? As always women's views seem to be counted as the least important.
I think it’s a reduction to say that someones sex depends upon how they feel – a woman or man is more than a feeling in your head:
Good grief, is that really what you think people are saying here?
No, I don’t think he’s ‘really’ male. I think he’s a female who has altered his body with surgery and drugs to approximate in some ways a male body.
But you refer to him as "he" rather than "she," presumably out of some form of respect, and yet could never tell him what you really believed. If I were in that position I'd find that difficult I think.
If I was talking to my ‘bestest friend’ about this we’d be talking about him specifically – that’s very different from talking about things in general.
Is it though? Does he have some sort of special exclusion, is he different in some way? When we generalise we dehumanise, "we should send all the foreigners back where they came from... apart from my mate Sajid of course, he's alright."
Are you really suggesting I shouldn’t share my views in case someone is hurt by them?
The other way around. I'm rather suggesting that you acknowledge that someone might be hurt by your views if you choose to share them.
Many women find it offensive that trans women say they are women.
They do indeed. And whether that offence is justified is a way bigger entire other discussion.
As always women’s views seem to be counted as the least important.
None of these views are mutually exclusive. The notion that the views of women are being trumped by the views of trans people is a bit TERFy though, are you sure you want to go down that road?
ransos
Gosh, I wish I could stop, it's far too late.
What are people saying then? What's the difference between 'identifying as' and 'feeling like'?
People are arguing that male and female has nothing to do with biology (or 'a penis' as Cougar reduces it to)* - that it's about how you feel inside: if you feel like a woman then you are a woman, your chromosomes, the gametes you produce, your ability to bear children, your genitals, your uterus and periods - these are not what a woman is; a women is someone who believes they're a woman. This is certainly what Stonewall suggest.
Please explain it to me better than that if it's not the case.
*Sorry Cougar
What’s the difference between ‘identifying as’ and ‘feeling like’?
What does your friend think? Have you asked him? You have a primary source of information at your fingertips here.
People are arguing that male and female has nothing to do with biology (or ‘a penis’ as Cougar reduces it to)* – that it’s about how you feel inside: if you feel like a woman then you are a woman, your chromosomes, the gametes you produce, your ability to bear children, your genitals, your uterus and periods – these are not what a woman is; a women is someone who believes they’re a woman.
No, they aren't.
This is the bullshit straw man that leads to the 'rapey bloke in a dress in toilets' attack.
Please explain it to me better than that if it’s not the case.
I / we have tried, repeatedly.
I might say on an argument on the internet that overweight people should lose a bit of weight for the sake of their health, as this is a theoretical argument. I probably wouldn't say that to my overweight friend as that would be personal. Nothing to do with asking for special treatment for my friend. And once again I think it's a bit rude of you to suggest this. I don't appreciate these "You could be saying let's get rid of immigrants", You could be saying "trans people are abusers" lines you come out with.
I still cannot make sense of your current argument. I know that religious people take their beliefs very seriously; It wouldn't stop me from arguing that I find their beliefs to be unconvincing. And I can discuss religion with believers, and tell them this. Why cannot I discuss trans issues with trans people?
Trans people find these views offensive? Whether that view is justified is part of a way bigger other discussion. See? I can throw it right back at you.
The notion that the views of transwomen are being trumped by the views of women makes you seem a bit misogynist. Are you sure you want to go down that road?
Sorry, I know I'm being facetious. I just don't know how else to respond to that sort of argument.
But you refer to him as “he” rather than “she,” presumably out of some form of respect, and yet could never tell him what you really believed. If I were in that position I’d find that difficult I think.
My religion analogy: I can respect my MiLs choice to believe in a God. I don't have to believe in it. Nor do I have to belittle her for it or call her out to her face for her belief.
I / we have tried, repeatedly.
Not very well.
And my friend hasn't done it very well either.
So go ahead, nice and clearly, no insults or accusations or misdirection: what is the difference between 'identifying as' and 'a feeling that you are'? because that's the argument I'm defending.
And we're back to the 'rapey' argument again are we? I said that being female is about biology, about the body, not how you feel. You choose to interpret this as me saying that transwoman are abusers! I honestly cannot see how you make that connection, so I think you must be doing it deliberately. For the record, just so you cannot try to throw that at me once again: I do not believe that transwomen are abusers, any more or any less than any other set of humans. Now can you drop it?
Why cannot I discuss trans issues with trans people?
Search me, you were the one that said you couldn't be honest with your friend for fear of hurting him.
Whatever. I'm boring myself now. Maybe tomorrow.
I notice you didn't attempt the simple explanation you claim you've made many times.
You choose to interpret this as me saying that transwoman are abusers!
Mate, let's stop for a minute.
I thought I'd already said this once tonight but it might have been on another thread. At least one of us is really tired and it might well be me.
So just so we're clear. I'm in no way attacking you, suggesting that you are making such claims or accusing you of anything. I was talking about elsewhere on the Internet not you personally. Again, if that's what you thought I was implying then I apologise.
I'm going to bed, I'll pick this up tomorrow.
Vicky Pea, agree 100% with this
I can’t help thinking that gender stereotypes have become more extreme in the past decade or 2. I’ve spent my life resisting suggestions that I ‘should’ be more feminine, that I’m a ‘bloke’, that I should dress a certain way, that I should have a nice handbag, that I shouldn’t swear, that I should find a nice feminine hobby instead of mountain biking….. but I don’t doubt that I’m a woman.
I think gender stereotyping is really unhelpful.
For the last two years I have been commuting via tram (away from the city center but towards all the 'nice' schools. School children make up about 90% of the passengers.
I have not seen a single girl with short hair. I yesterday I noticed a girl with a chin length bob cut but ALL the other have long hair down to their shoulder blades.
I've read accounts of how girl toddlers were quite happy to play with stereotypically 'boy' toys and had short hair (and vice versa for boys) until they mixed with more children and were told 'that's for boys' or 'you have boys hair'.
Gender stereotypes harm us all.
The 80s is starting to look like some long lost utopia.