Polite Ticks

(These are my observations from the sidelines.  I am in no way claiming to be an authority or indeed particularly informed.  What I am is a concerned citizen. I welcome your insightful comments, your observations, your experiences. I greet you with love, I welcome you as you are.  I simply seek to understand. and to be understood.)

At birth is our sex recorded, or is our gender assigned?

This question seems to be the great divide between radical feminists and transactivists…and could this be the tipping point of political correctness?

Or, could this confusion all be a semantic misunderstanding brought on by the need to be polite?

‘Gender’ is a lovely polite term, it means we can avoid saying ‘sex’ and pretend we aren’t asking about the genitals of a new baby.  It is also a dangerous term that gave rise to the industry of gender stereotyping.  The idea that there are ‘boy things’ and ‘girl things’, and ‘boy behaviours’ and ‘girl behaviours’.  That women like high heels and make up, and men like power tools.

Unfortunately, because we do not like to say ‘sex’, despite (or because of?) being a sex-obsessed and overly sexualised society, the biological issues are being pushed aside in favour of the ‘gender’ issues.

The politics surrounding this polite term include many necessary human rights issues as well as some strange political correct issues.  Instead of a grey area, we have a divide.  A Chasm of semantics, where both sides seem set on a similar outcome but their key differences mean there is no middle ground.

The necessary human rights issues related to the gender and sex are addressed in anti-discrimination laws.  The sex discrimination law (Australia) covers things like fairness in employment, reproductive status/potential, breastfeeding rights, harassment,  and discrimination based on sexual orientation, marital status, and gender identity.

The gender identity aspect relates to problems caused for those awesome individuals that do not fit the society-approved gender stereotypes.  The laws aim to protect and acknowledge the ridiculousness of the stereotypes.  These issues are separate to sex-based ones, and yet merged with them.

 The gender issue has created a wonderful distraction, keeping us from seeing some of the serious issues our Governments would rather not contend with.  There are many urgent issues we need to be focusing on, that we need to be aware of, but with the focus on identity, we barely touch on these.

Our patriarchal society likes to infantalise us, and this obsession with identity is the perfect ruse.  It is superficial and even childish to be focused on ‘identity’ in this way.   This focus on identity allows those who do not wish to ‘grow up’ and face real world problems to remain self obsessed.  By demanding more and more  ‘polite ticks’, a mockery of political correctness forms.  In our attempts to be inclusive we become more and more divided.  The race to be the biggest minority, with prizes of grants, funding, recognition, awards and attention, means constantly redefining in an attempt to retain minority status.  The real purpose of this race is to distract us.  As long as we run this race, the patriarchy remains.  And we are too busy to notice what else is going on.

The damage being done by this ‘distraction’ is not to be ignored.  It is not minor.  It is not acceptable.  By pushing aside ‘sex’ we are seeing the erosion of female, are we on the cusp of the disappearance of female?  Ironically some trans-activists claim it is prudish and bigoted to discuss ‘sex’ and to consider ‘gender’ as a social construct.  Gender politics does not seem to think it is inclusive to discuss reproductive-related issues (menstruation, pregnancy, lactation, the pay gap, sex-based oppression, domestic violence).  These are not considered important or relevant to being ‘female’.  And along side this, we have medical transitions happening to align feelings with bodies.  Despite the fact that feelings change.  Despite the fact that messing with biology through artificial hormones and cosmetic surgery has life long and detrimental impacts, and despite the fact that all this just cements the gender stereotypes further into our social conditioning.  No one is winning.  No One.

We need to stop this superficial focus and start breaking down these stereotypes.  It seems very simple to me.

We have our sex.  Male or female.  Very rarely someone is intersex.  This is a biological reality.  It is what it is.  Each individual has medical and health decisions to be made based on this reality.  Mutilating genitals will not alter this, just further complicate things and commit the individual to a lifetime of (expensive) medical interventions.

The rest is personality.   The complexity of this, and it’s relatedness to sex, seems to be based on this idea that feminine equals female, and masculine equals male.  But we can see, we can observe, that this is false.  The masculine-feminine continuum shows us this.

For illustrative purposes, these bell curves show the sex overlap based on the masculine-feminine continuum of gender.
For illustrative purposes, these bell curves show the sex overlap based on the masculine-feminine continuum of gender.

Whilst there may be a tendency to support the idea that sex=gender, the overlap is significant. And the extremes are not the majority.  They are separate aspects of who we are.

Who we are is further complicated by sexual orientation, sexuality, interests, hobbies, socioeconomics, demographics, skin colour, cultural background, race, religion, opportunities…

venyou.jpg If we take ‘gender’ to mean a description of ones place on the feminine-masculine continuum, it is clear that this is unrelated to our sex and as the Venn-you Diagram displays, just one aspect of what influences ones identity.

Rather than trying to box people into a single category of ‘male’ or ‘female’ based on gender, we should be celebrating the awesomeness of our complete individuality.  We should not lose sight of the importance of our sex.  Whilst there is so much more to us than our sex, there are critical health and social issues related to our sex that impact who we are, who we can be and how we can be.

The sex discrimination act was written to acknowledge this.

The gender issue is important.  We need to break down the damaging stereotypes.  The idea that there are ‘boy things’ and ‘girl things’.  The measure of feminine to masculine qualities is a continuum NOT a hierarchy.  We need to break away from the very flawed idea that masculine is superior.  We need to break away from the idea that masculine = male and feminine = female.

We need to Acknowledge the damage being done by gender stereotyping to those who do not conform.  That there is an underlying homophobic agenda seems apparent, and that a misogynistic undercurrent flows through the (trans)gender debate.

Our education system needs to cover menstruation, breastfeeding and normal birth biology and health classes in a much more meaningful way.

The pornification of women and children MUST STOP.  It is NOT empowering.  It is driven by economics and patriarchal politics.

Placing technology (medical) over physiology (natural) science is evolving humans away from humanity.

If you think you are ‘woke’ by supporting trans-activism, open your eyes a little further.  It is not bigoted to question anything.  Look beyond the ‘polite ticks’ of inclusion and ask yourself:

What is really going on?



5 thoughts on “Polite Ticks”

  1. Pingback: Upping the Anti…or Why is it bad to ask Questions? – Beautiful Heart

  2. Reblogged this on Beautiful Heart and commented:

    A longitudinal study in 1990’s England looked at toy choice and childhood behaviour as a predictor of sexuality. You can read about the study here: https://4thwavenow.com/2018/08/07/research-evidence-gender-atypical-tots-likely-to-become-gay-or-lesbian-not-trans/

    There has been discussion about the trans movement, in part, being homophobic. The transitioning to the sex that your behaviour more typically represents has been motivated,by some, as a ‘cure’ for homosexuality.

    As a parent, of 11 years, I have seen a shift from ‘gender neutral’ to ‘gender-focused’:
    The ‘gender neutral’ phase – this was the idea that toys were not gendered, and providing a variety and trying not to encourage a particular choice. This also included clothing. This did have a leaning towards ‘masculine’, in the same way that second wave feminism leaned toward this. Feminine was still seen as a weak choice, or less bold, or restrictive. Any domestic-related toy was considered bad. Chores still need to be done, and childhood is a great place to skill up regardless of sex. But the domestic is devalued, and still strongly linked to feminine. I felt that this phase was about raising corporate futurists: the hope being they would earn so much money that could outsource the domestic (and feminine) aspects of life (such as housework, daily cooking, shopping and childcare). Some took this idea to the point of not revealing the sex of their child in order to avoid external influences. It is well known that we have bias when it comes to typical sex behaviours. I noticed this in the colours I dressed my bald baby in. If my baby was in blue (which was often, as I like blue), people would say “you’ll break hearts”, “Aren’t you a strong little thing”, and “You look very smart!”. If, however, I put my baby in not-blue, the commentary was very gentle and soft, sweet and pretty. The assumptions that went with this colour based bias was a blue baby was a boy, and the ‘other’ was a girl. Even though blue was once considered feminine, and pink masculine, the current bias was universal and unconscious. It was a fascinating social observation. I tried very hard to speak to all babies with an awareness of my bias. I tried to acknowledge the intelligence of all of them, there babbles got a “tell me more, you know so much!” or “that is very interesting”…

    The ‘gender-focused’ phase, lead by the the trans movement seemed to replace this very quickly…maybe this was an illusion on my part (being busy doing parenting, time takes on a different rhythm). Suddenly, ‘gender’ was all that mattered, and the biology (sex) was the problem. It was considered best to medically alter a child to align with ‘gender’ rather than support an individual’s natural development. To question this thinking made you a bigot or a TERF. It was like waking up in the twilight zone!

    The gender-focus seems to unnecessarily complicate life, it is very political and makes for a wonderful distraction from more serious issues facing humanity (like climate change and refugees). It seems this gender-focused phase, has a parallel evolution with the selfie and the rise in narcissism.

    The load voices of the social media influencers seem to be the voices of ‘me me me’, these people do not use their platform to promote anything other then themselves.

    I am reminded of the kind hearted passion of Adam Hill’s in his ‘Happyism’ show. In the show he tells the story of the time he met the Dalai Lama, who said: “You have a microphone, use it to say something”. (if you have not seen this show, from 2013, I encourage you to do so. #touchthefrog).

  3. Pingback: Identity Crisis – Beautiful Heart

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: