Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!daemon
From: bloch%mandrill@ucsd.edu (Steve Bloch)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: gender/sex (was feminist spirituality)
Message-ID: <12602@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Date: 10 Jul 89 08:41:48 GMT
References: <1336@cattell.psych.upenn.edu> <42102@bbn.COM> <6740@sdcsvax.UCSD.Edu> <12411@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <6752@sdcsvax.UCSD.Edu> <42272@bbn.COM>
Sender: ambar@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: bloch%mandrill.UUCP@ucsd.edu (Steve Bloch)
Organization: University of California, San Diego
Lines: 32
Approved: ambar@bloom-beacon.mit.edu

I wrote:
SB>Can you give
SB>me a clearer picture of where this sex/gender distinction lies?

rshapiro@BBN.COM (Richard Shapiro) responded:
RS>We can designate a person with ovaries and a uterus "female" and a
RS>person with testicles "male" and by this means completely partition
RS>the human species into two exclusive groups. There is no analagous way
RS>in which a person, or a behavior, can be designated "feminine" or
RS>"masculine"....  the two define, not
RS>a polarity like "male" and "female", but a continuum.

OK, I'll grant that, but if there's no absolute, exclusive distinction,
why do we have to categorize things into "feminine" and "masculine" in
the first place?  Why not call the ends of the continuum "snark" and
"boojum" instead?  Why not have three, or fifteen, categories rather
than two?  How solid is the rock on which this "gender theory" is
built?  Or does gender theory include what I just said ?

Aha.  You're objecting to the Transcendental Feminine on grounds that
the meaning of "feminine" is culturally-defined and fluid.  This is
not the circular reasoning of defining a word and then drawing con-
clusions about the real world based on that definition, but rather
observing the existing definition of "feminine" and pointing out that
it IS fluid, and therefore can't possibly refer to something transcen-
dental.  In which case I'm in total agreement, and there's nothing to
argue about.  :-)

"A crystalline set of dominoes / Except not really crystalline;
And sort of domino-like, / But not really." -- Jane Siberry

bloch%cs@ucsd.edu